Andreas Henriksson wrote: > It seems obvious to me that the above policy snippet was written in a > time when the universe revolved around sysvinit. In current day and age > sysvinit itself would be an "Alternate init system". We could update the > snippet to say that any package providing support for an alternate init > system must also provide systemd units if we wanted to modernize this > part of policy.
I don't follow: why would we need such a requirement, given that systemd knows how to execute init scripts?
