On Tue 14 Oct 2014 at 14:22:03 -0400, Miles Fidelman wrote: > Brian wrote: > >Depends what you mean by "supported". There is no problem in installing > >sysvinit after an upgrade or before upgrading. It works really well. > > "No problem" is easier to say than to validate. > > First off, there's a big difference between a default installation > of systemd, followed by replacing it with sysvinit-core, vs. being > presented with an install choice (as one is when it comes to boot > loader, for example).
I think you should look at the difficulties that d-i would have in offering alternative init systems. It most probably isn't insurmountable beause nothing ever is. However, the "big diffference" is not something I follow; primarily because the install choice doesn't exist, There is also the question of what drawbacks there are for most users when d-i simply installs the init system Debian has decided to use. For nearly 20 years I've never been asked which init system I want. If I'm asked now I could very well wonder whether they know what they are doing. Or it would confuse me. :) > > Finally, there's the matter of regression testing. Debian Policy, > and the TC resolution, state that alternate init systems must be > supported - with specific reference to sysvinit scripts - but I kind I don't think Debian Policy has anything to say on the situation *at present*. The TC resolution may not say what you think it says. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/14102014195345.64cb7007b...@desktop.copernicus.demon.co.uk
