So then, you are saying that all those links back to /bin/systemctl are not
important, or even, just a mistake? And the man pages - nothing useful? We
do not need systemd-sysv? Then, why does it exist? I think this line of
reasoning is foolish - or absurd.
systemd-sysvinit can't be essential since that'd force it onto all
I don't claim to be a Debian packaging expert. I've only looked through the
documentation. Fine - don't make systemd-sysv an "Essential" package, just
make it Provides: init, Conflicts: init, and Replaces: init, or some such.
Either way, I do not accept any insinuation that the Debian packaging system
is somehow "broken" and not able to handle multiple "init" packages. That is
also an absurd line of reasoning.
There will have to be some changes in the package configuration of both
sysvinit and systemd-sysv - sooner or later. Please offer some useful
solutions, rather than foot-dragging and throwing road-blocks.
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact firstname.lastname@example.org