grml-debootstrap icon indicating copy to clipboard operation
grml-debootstrap copied to clipboard

Published 20 hours ago • verified publisher icon grml

Drop package acpi-support-base?

Open mika opened this issue 9 years ago • 6 comments

acpi-support-base shouldn't be installed with systems running systemd according to https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=783247 - we should think about dropping it from the default package list. I'm unsure yet though what to do about systems without systemd and how to handle that then. Maybe by supporting packages.$release or so?

mika avatar Apr 25 '15 23:04 mika

packages.$release sounds like a plan.

hartwork avatar May 06 '15 15:05 hartwork

Ok, we could start by copying the existing packages file to packages.{lenny,squeeze,wheezy} and then adjust for packages.jessie and packages.stretch. Then drop packages file overall and don't install /etc/debootstrap/packages any longer that way, only if the file exists then use it, otherwise default to /etc/debootstrap/packages.$release. This should ensure more flexibility with regards to target releases without breaking backwards compatibility for users customizing /etc/debootstrap/packages too much.

mika avatar May 08 '15 12:05 mika

On users who customized /etc/debootstrap/packages, the only way to make sure they do not accidentally install machines with a config other than their custom packages (but with say packages.jessie) would be to

  • not ship packages any more and
  • quit with an error asking the user to rename/copy of packages to packages.${release}.

Personally, that's what I'd want as a user. What do you think?

hartwork avatar May 08 '15 12:05 hartwork

I'm unsure yet though what to do about systems without systemd

I'd assume systemd will always be there, IMO, as long as it is still "in-the-trend".

This can "un-complicate" things a bit, again IMO.

suntong avatar Aug 11 '19 13:08 suntong

systemd is present only in more recent Debian releases, and also isn't necessary/relevant when creating a container based system (where systemd wouldn't even really work).

More generic answer: we shouldn't try to manage a global package list that fits every single Debian/release, instead the list should be per release and it should be possible to easily remove/add packages on demand.

mika avatar Aug 11 '19 13:08 mika

systemd is present only in more recent Debian releases...

Ah, thx for the explain.

the list should be per release

or, still keep a global package list that is the base for every single Debian/release, then per release based fine tuning (adding their own if necessary).

suntong avatar Aug 11 '19 13:08 suntong