Re: usr-merge
David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> wrote:
> On Thu 02 Jan 2020 at 19:49:45 (+0100), Sven Hartge wrote:
>> But, to summarize: I'd have liked for this change to be done in a
>> different way with *all* systems-maintainers in board.
> Reading #914897, that didn't seem likely as views were somewhat
> entrenched.
Well, this *is* Debian, where often problems are discussed without
decision until either the problems are no longer a problem or one of the
discussion parties goes away.
But, to be fair, Debian is in a unique position in regard of the
usr-merge: Because it supports seamless and even partial upgrades from
one release to the other, it has to accommodate all sorts of setups for
a very very long time or provide a flawless migration path, which is not
easy, to say the least.
Other distributions of the more enterprisey style, like RHEL/Centos or
SLES can just declare something like "non-usr-merged systems cannot be
upgraded from X to Y and need to be reinstalled" and be done like it.
Debian prided itself of never having needed that, be it the labourous
libc5 to glibc2 migration, the a.out to ELF switch or several g++ ABI
breakages.
So I am giving Debian some slack here.
Grüße,
Sven.
--
Sigmentation fault. Core dumped.
Reply to: