[Jonas Smedegaard] > What do you mean by "install sysvinit-core again"? Did you perhaps not > test bootstrapping but reverting an already systemd-contaminated system?
Yes, I did. Building the images using freedom-maker will end up with systemd, so one need to revert it after boot. > Did you test on unstable or testing? I test on unstable, and I ran 'apt-get install sysvinit-core. This proposed to remove firewalld and freedombox-setup. But when I instead try to run 'apt-get install systemd-shim sysvinit-core', it do not propose to remove freedombox-setup. So you are right, it is possible to still use sysvinit. No idea why apt-get proposed to remove freedombox-setup when it isn't required. On the other hand, aptitude only propose to keep freedombox-setup as its second proposal, so this issue is something common to both apt and aptitude. But as long as the default with freedom-maker end up with systemd, I suspect it is less work for us to go with the flow and keep it. -- Happy hacking Petter Reinholdtsen _______________________________________________ Freedombox-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/freedombox-discuss
