Hi Sven, sven@stormbind.net writes: > * Package name : exfatprogs [snip] > > Since people started to ping me about getting this one introduced > I now give in and pick it up. I plan to continue for now the > maintenance of the fuse-exfat and exfat-utils packages. > While fuse-exfat can be coinstalled at any moment exfat-utils and > exfatprogs will for now conflict with each other. > Maybe I later on drop the mkfs.exfat and fsck.exfat links from > the exfat-utils package. Might /etc/alternatives also be considered for mkfs.exfat and fsck.exfat? Also, what about /sbin/mount.exfat? That one also seems like a candicate for /etc/alternatives. Probably tangential: I wonder if this is a case where a virtual package (where both the Samsung and the exfat-utils Provide exfat-tools or similar) could be considered? As you know, I'm primarily interested in backports, and I wonder if whatever the kernel team does with Wireguard would be a useful precedent to follow. eg: if newer kernels Provide: feature that that was previously wireguard-dkms. 'not sure if that's over-engineering dependency and feature resolution though ;-) Thank you, Nicholas
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature