Re: merged /usr
On 2021-07-27 Wouter Verhelst <wouter@debian.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 02:13:33PM +0200, Andreas Metzler wrote:
[...]
>> Afaiu you are suggesting to do somethink like this instead and
>> immediately post bulleye release.
>> ----------------------------------------
>> preinst upgrade|install
>> if aliasing-symlinks /bin --> /usr/bin
>> # do nothing
>> else
>> mv /bin/mv /usr/bin/mv
> That should be a copy (mv is too dangerous)
>> ln -s /usr/bin/mv /bin/mv
> This can be "ln -sf" to make it atomic.
>> fi
>> Plus corresponding error handling code in postrm abort install.
>> ----------------------------------------
> Yes, but for packages in the Essential set only. For other packages, we
> can make it much simpler.
>> I just do not get the benefit. It seems rather complicated with
>> potential for breakage in corner cases and unnecessary since we (CTTE)
>> have essentially decided that there is going to be a cutoff date
>> pre-bookworm-release whereupon package maintainers can rely on the
>> existence of aliasing-symlinks and can simply move the file without any
>> maintainerscripts. It seems to be a waste of work to write
>> complicated maintainerscripts that are only needed as long as we need to
>> handle both usrmerge-d and non-usrmerge-d systems.
> I'm not worried about the support for both usrmerge'd and not usrmerge'd
> systems.
> I'm worried about systems being written to completely bypass the dpkg
> database.
Hello Wouter,
I think we complicated things enormously and caused real breakage by
trying to support both setups. This has already caused considerable work
without longterm gain and is preventing us to reach an unbroken state
(dpkg knowning the correct paths on all systems) again. That is what I
see as goal.
The maintainerscript setup for symlinking looks like a lot of work and
muddles the whole situation even more, there are more files/symlinks
dpkg does not know about and our systems diverge even more. I really do
not get how that is a step forward.
> It's being pushed forward "because we broke things in the past
> and now the only way to fix it is to break even more things". That's BS.
[...]
When you say "break more things" you are thinking of the social effect
(alienating Guillem)? I am not aware of any plans for new technical
breakage.
cu Andreas
PS: As you can probably tell English is not my native language so please
take the whole mail with a grain of salt if I did not manage to hit the
correct level of politeness.
--
`What a good friend you are to him, Dr. Maturin. His other friends are
so grateful to you.'
`I sew his ears on from time to time, sure'
Reply to: