Post by Marco d'Itri Post by Marco d'Itri
Please stop using graphs showing how various teams have forced
systemd onto users' systems as if it is somehow a democratic
endorsement of the outcome.
I am not sure about how the concept of democracy applies to this, but
the graph clearly shows that nobody is being forced to do anything and
indeed about 4000 users choose to install systemd-shim and to not use
Ok, let me explain Steve's POV. Many packages depended on
libpam-systemd before systemd-shim was ever in the archive, leading to
systemd-sysv being installed by a normal dist-upgrade on Sid (and,
although I am not sure, testing). The alternative was often to have
GNOME or Network Manager removed, two very popular packages (and the
latter quite important). Even after systemd-shim was uploaded to the
archive (still at logind v204 here), libpam-systemd depended on
"systemd-sysv | systemd-shim". This meant that users' systems would
switch init systems on a normal dist-upgrade *unless* they manually
intervened and knew which package they had to install to avoid that.
Finally, systemd v208 was uploaded to unstable with an unconditional
dependency on systemd-sysv. All of these actions led to users
experiencing a change of init system before they had taken action to
change init systems, which means that the graphs are not reliable in
claiming that the majority of users wanted systemd as their init system.
I can not speak for Steve, but I recognize that some or all of those
actions above were called for. The final one especially (systemd v208
upload), since their was ample warning and communication (something
like one or two months I think), the move was a long time coming, and
systemd was chosen as the default init system by then (not true for the
other two actions).
I hope that helps you understand how the graph does not depict how many
users elected to use systemd as their init system.