Re: [RFC PATCH 0/9] hybrid systemd/sysvinit

[Richard Purdie <richard.purdie@linuxfoundation.org>]

On Tue, 2013-03-12 at 08:42 +0100, Koen Kooi wrote:
> Op 11 mrt. 2013, om 23:49 heeft Khem Raj <raj.khem@gmail.com> het volgende geschreven:
> 
> > 
> > On Mar 11, 2013, at 2:47 PM, Otavio Salvador <otavio@ossystems.com.br> wrote:
> > 
> >> On Mon, Mar 11, 2013 at 6:37 PM, Burton, Ross <ross.burton@intel.com> wrote:
> >>> On 11 March 2013 13:07, Ross Burton <ross.burton@intel.com> wrote:
> >>>> This series allows you to have both sysvinit and systemd in DISTRO_FEATURES.
> >>>> Packages will be built with both init scripts, and some daemons will be linking
> >>>> to libsystemd-daemon so that will be pulled in to sysvinit images.
> >>> 
> >>> Regarding the upgrade path, Richard/Paul/myself discussed this over
> >>> lunch and proposed that oe-core could gain an include file for distro
> >>> configuration that basically injects the backward compatibility
> >>> dependencies.  So for meta-systemd, it would inject
> >>> replaces/provides/conflicts for each of the packages in meta-systemd.
> >>> This would isolate the dependencies into a single location, and be
> >>> opt-in for distros that previously shipped meta-systemd.  Hopefully
> >>> the implementation of this is obvious, and patches to implement this
> >>> are welcome.
> >> 
> >> I personally prefer to still use meta-oe systemd class and keep the
> >> possibility to product images with choosen init system. I think Martin
> >> will also prefer it.
> > 
> > using different init manager is a separate problem than what Ross tried to address here isn't it ?
> > I personally don't have a use case where I would upgrade live from 1.3 to 1.4 so
> > for me I could easily accept a different solution for 1.4
> 
> Upgrading between 1.3 and 1.4 is already impossible for non-systemd
> related reasons.

Which reasons?

Cheers,

Richard