Re: DEP 17: Improve support for directory aliasing in dpkg
On Tue, 9 May 2023 at 05:12, Helmut Grohne <helmut@subdivi.de> wrote:
>
> Hi Luca,
>
> On Tue, May 09, 2023 at 01:56:53AM +0100, Luca Boccassi wrote:
> > On Mon, 8 May 2023 at 19:06, Sean Whitton <spwhitton@spwhitton.name> wrote:
> > > It's designed to stop as-yet-unknown problems happening, too.
> >
> > Well, sure, but we've been at this for years, any such problems should
> > really be known by now. This is with Bookworm as it stands of course,
> > when we go in and make more changes then we obviously have to be
> > careful, but that's the entire reason this thread exists and is still
> > going on.
>
> This actually feels rather worrying to me. On one hand, you say that
> problems should be know. On the other hand, you proposed a simple
> transition with quite a number of problems that you apparently didn't
> see coming. Even relatively simple mechanisms, such as just repacking
> all the .debs to ship files in their canonical location and then trying
> to install them, revealed a dpkg unpack error in zutils. This
> combination of claiming that problems should be known while at the same
> time apparently not knowing them makes me uneasy to move forward here.
>
> So while I want to see the moratorium lifted, it all makes a lot more
> sense to me given what we've seen in this thread. The worst of outcomes
> I see here is the one where we cause problems that don't have a good
> solution as any way forward would break someone's use case (with
> someone's use case often being smooth upgrades in one way or another).
> It's those where we cannot move forward nor revert.
No need to get worried! With "Bookworm as it stands" I mean that
literally. What we ship in Bookworm has been stable for years, so
while something new could be lurking somewhere, it seems vanishingly
unlikely at this stage.
Once we start changing things in Trixie, in whichever way we decide,
that's of course all new and all bets are off.
Kind regards,
Luca Boccassi
Reply to: