Systemd conversion versus updates in back Fedora branches
hhorak at redhat.com
Mon Oct 24 15:17:27 UTC 2011
On 10/24/2011 04:52 PM, Tom Lane wrote:
> I'm not really seeing why this'd be a better approach than what I
> suggested above.
This isn't better in case we don't ship -sysvinit sub-package. This was
meant as a general approach which should work even if a user has
installed sysvinit scripts from a sub-package (not mysql case).
> It requires more assumptions about the behavior of the
> systemd-sysv-convert code than I'm comfortable with --- in particular,
> that that subsystem still keeps information around after a conversion
> has been completed.
Yes, it's not perfect. But feasible from my pov.
More information about the devel