Re: Status on Vendor Profile
Niels Thykier <niels@thykier.net> writes:
> Secondly there is the handling of the "default" profile. Originally I
> planned for this to be a symlink because it was easier (code-wise), but
> does git handle symlinks sanely? If not, we lose the "git clone + set
> LINTIAN_ROOT + run" property we have now in master (even with the
> changes above).
> Would it be better for us to instead rely on dpkg-vendor to supply a
> default profile name (either in general or in the absence of the default
> symlink)?
Git handles symlinks fairly well, but wouldn't that require Ubuntu to
fiddle with the symlink separately from the Debian package? I really like
the idea of having a single *.deb that could be installed on either Debian
or Ubuntu, and while we could play with things in postinst, dpkg-vendor
feels cleaner to me.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: