Hi Arturo, thanks for your comments.
[...] >> Done. Please see my 'hyperscan-with-alternatives' branch [1] for a >> version using alternatives. > > Ok. > > I think this is the way to go, thanks Sascha. Sure, no problem. > One more thing: do you think it's time for us to introduce the change > at this point in the release cycle of Stretch? > Perhaps we should wait until the release, some months ahead, so we > make sure suricata is well established into stable. > My plan is to upload suricata 3.2 today, and I would like to avoid NEW > and backports-NEW for this upload. Yes, I see your point and agree that having 3.2 in testing in time for the freeze is a priority. What do you think about the following course of action: get 3.2 into testing now, and after the (soft? full?) stretch freeze we upload a split-hyperscan package for the version that is current at that time? I will keep the split-hyperscan versions up-to-date with the official state of unstable/jessie-backports anyway (to be used internally by my organization). So I wouldn't expect the final effort to introduce the split package into Debian to be too bad. Cheers Sascha
