Re: Request: removal of package lilo from testing
- To: debian-release@lists.debian.org
- Subject: Re: Request: removal of package lilo from testing
- From: Moritz Mühlenhoff <jmm@inutil.org>
- Date: Sun, 1 Dec 2019 19:07:51 +0100
- Message-id: <[🔎] slrnqu80bn.abi.jmm@inutil.org>
- References: <20191111193422.2852bbf4@jupiter.home> <5d453693-d82c-e432-0fb5-301cd881ed05@debian.org> <20191116134252.26f3d959@jupiter.home> <c47b003d-af7e-2744-878a-ba8569ca5464@debian.org> <20191129180158.680d44ad@jupiter.home> <6b9b3caa-ce17-7272-b951-92d18a3c4a5d@debian.org> <20191130112533.734cbf42@jupiter.home>
Joachim Wiedorn <joodebian@joonet.de> schrieb:
>> Your approach above will be good for users of unstable and testing, but
>> how does this help users of stable, when they upgrade from buster to
>> bullseye after the release of the latter? Just by writing this in the
>> release notes? Is that the best we can do?
>
> That's right, it doesn't help users of stable and oldstable, if they make
> an upgrade.=20
>
> But then the only solution is making a transitional package "lilo" which
> have dependency to grub2, which will install grub2 and remove the binaries
> of lilo. This can entail many risks. Because of many different system
> structures it could be, that at the end there is no functioning booting on
> this system ...=20
I doubt that's really needed? Anyone who willingly installed lilo over the
default in the last decade (or longer) made a very specific expert choice,
simply mentioning that in the release notes should be totally fine.
Cheers,
Moritz
Reply to: