Re: RFC: Idea for improved diversions and alternatives handling

[Ian Jackson <ian@davenant.greenend.org.uk>]

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.

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 haven't thought this through yet but I'll sleep on it and see if it
becomes any clearer ...

Ian.