[linux-elitists] How about a fork of Jessie without systemd?

Rick Moen rick at linuxmafia.com
Sun Aug 2 22:40:22 PDT 2015


Quoting Don Marti (dmarti at zgp.org):

> So if exampleware 1.0 does not depend on systemd,
> but exampleware 1.1 does, would the user who installs
> both exampleware and prevent-systemd end up stuck
> on exampleware 1.0 when exampleware 1.1 comes out,
> or would that user be forced to remove either
> prevent-systemd or exampleware?

The prevent-* packages substantively consist just of a Conflicts line.
Here's the one inside the 'control' file of the latest
prevent-systemd-running deb:

Package: prevent-systemd-running
Version: 28
Section: metapackages
Priority: extra
Architecture: all
Multi-Arch: foreign
Conflicts: live-config-systemd, systemd-cron, systemd-sysv, systemd-ui
Installed-Size: 44
Origin: WTF
Maintainer: Thorsten Glaser <tg at mirbsd.de>
Bugs: mailto:wtf at mirbsd.org
Source: mirabilos-support
Description: mirabilos metapackage to avoid running systemd
 This metapackage ensures that systemd is not used as the init
 system for your computer. This is necessary to enable standard
 Unix/GNU/Linux system administrators to operate your system.
 .
 This variant of the metapackage permits installation of systemd
 to satisfy package dependencies, but not of the systemd-sysv
 package which takes over the init system.
 Note that, once installed, systemd can still be run by changing
 the <E2><80><9C>init=<E2><80><9D> kernel parameter. Be careful.
important: yes


To answer your question as seems most informative, the presence of a
prevent-* package on the system merely ensures that the initial attempt
to install a package with a conflicting Depends will initially fail.
How the sysadmin then decides to proceed is up to him/her.

There have been systemd packages in Debian for something like five
years, now, and the problems remain localised to GNOME, gdm, and
NetworkManager.  Could the sky fall tomorrow?  Magic 8 ball unclear.



More information about the linux-elitists mailing list