On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 07:56:41PM +0100, Ian Jackson wrote:
brian m. carlson writes ("Re: RFC: Idea for improved diversions and alternatives handling"):You still have to handle multiple diversions for /bin/sh. When d-i installs the system, you have to have a working /bin/sh immediately; you can't wait for the alternatives mechanism to be set up. And the only other option I see (other than diversions) is to prohibit changing /bin/sh, which will make a lot of people very upset. I agree that alternatives are the optimal tool here, but I don't know how that can be achieved. Suggestions welcome.So you're saying this situation calls for diverting a file to make way for an alternative. This seems like it will involve the diversions and alternatives mechanisms fighting each other. It'll have a great many moving parts and probably be buggy.
No. I said that I'd prefer /bin/sh to be managed by alternatives. I also said that /bin/sh is essential, even at the very beginning of installation. I also demonstrated a case where diversions may have to be used, even though they're (IMHO) a poor choice, unless some brilliant person figures out how to make alternatives work. I did not suggest diverting a file to make way for an alternative. I agree that down that path, madness lies.
This scenario leads me to suggest that perhaps the right answer is to unify diversions and alternatives. If we can come up with a single mostly-dpkg-implemented feature to do both then we at least have some chance to get it right. (It might also help with some of the transition problems I mentioned earlier.)
I'm certainly interested in hearing more. -- brian m. carlson / brian with sandals: Houston, Texas, US +1 713 440 7475 | http://crustytoothpaste.ath.cx/~bmc | My opinion only troff on top of XML: http://crustytoothpaste.ath.cx/~bmc/code/thwack OpenPGP: RSA v4 4096b 88AC E9B2 9196 305B A994 7552 F1BA 225C 0223 B187
Description: Digital signature