Bug#1051371: Post-/usr-merge paths for script interpreters
Control: block 1051371 by 1050001
Hi,
On Tue, 2023-09-12 at 20:48 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> I think the root problem behind this bug is that it is revealing we have
> not made a decision about /bin and /usr/bin path references in Debian
> after /usr-merge. Various people, myself included, made assumptions about
> what the policy would be, but we never actually decided anything that I am
> aware of and people's assumptions are not matching. I think we need to
> talk about this directly, after which what to do with this bug will
> probably become obvious.
>
> So far as I can tell, there are three main possibilities:
>
> (a) Although /bin and /usr/bin are merged (and likewise for the other
> merged paths), Debian will continue to require (or at least recommend)
> use of /bin paths for things such as /bin/sh that historically used
> those paths.
>
> (b) Since /bin and /usr/bin (and likewise for the other paths) are merged,
> /bin/sh and /usr/bin/sh are equivalent. Packages can use whichever
> path they want, and Debian will end up with a mix of both references.
>
> (c) Although /bin and /lib technically work due to the aliasing, they are
> deprecated and everything in Debian should stop using those paths.
> All paths should point to /usr/bin and /usr/lib now.
As far as I understand people wanting merged-/usr want (b) (I do).
There have been people advocating (a) in this bug.
However, there is a proposal by Jackson for an alternative filesystem
layout based on symlink farms in consideration by the technical
committee. This advocates removing compat symlinks in /bin, /sbin over
time[1], thus requiring (c).
The technical committee should therefore probably be aware of this
policy issue in their consideration of #1050001; the resolution of
which might also cover this issue (#1051371).
Ansgar
[1]: https://bugs.debian.org/1050001#33
Reply to: