Dear Maintainer,

Trying to work out support for a new UPS I acquired, I found this upstream
github issue about supporting the protocol needed to get full information
out of my new hardware: https://github.com/networkupstools/nut/issues/139 (I
am fastcat in that discussion).

One item that came out of it: being able to install apcupsd side-by-side
would help work around this issue, but is not currently possible due to
conflicts between the packages.

AFAICT, this conflict centers _solely_ on the sysvinit script for
nut-client, or more precisely the /etc/init.d/ups-monitor symlink.  This is
no longer provided by upstream, but rather by the debian package.

If this symlink was removed, the conflict on apcupsd could be dropped, and
the two packages installed side-by-side.

Since this is just a symlink, I think it may be safe to remove it.  I think
it should be simple enough to write some post-upgrade logic to rewrite any
/etc/rcN.d links to the proper name, if they even exist?

Hello Matthew,

AFAIK, ups-monitor was never provided by upstream

The symlink is used for integration with sysvinit and removing it means
that it will breaks integration with it (the UPS would not be shutdown
anymore in case of power failure, meaning that the connected computer
would not restart when the power is back). Even I'm personally not using
(or testing with) sysvinit anymore, the debian project is still supposed
to support it as we still have users and some derivatives are depending
on us for it.

Also, both nut and apcupsd have systemd integration we would need to
test if there are bad interactions when both are installed and running,
not something that I've time todo for the moment.

So I'm not too sure about this

Kind regards,

Laurent Bigonville