Hi Adam, On Mon, Dec 25, 2017 at 06:06:23PM +0100, Adam Borowski wrote: > As I filed this just before Stretch's freeze, and you didn't act immediately, > the freeze precluded us from killing old rxvt. It'd be nice if you could do > so for Buster.
Thanks for reminding me of this. I have a backlog of changes to urxvt I want to
upload in the next few days, so I'll make this change with those.
> I think, though, that instead of migrating to rxvt-unicode-256color, it might
> be better to take over rxvt, make it the primary package, and make all other
> variants be dummy transitionals for it.
To confirm, you suggest making "rxvt" the primary binary package, and making the
following dummy transitionals for it:
* aterm
* rxvt-unicode
* rxvt-unicode-256color
I also propose making rxvt-unicode-lite a transition package. I don't know that
saving 200kb in an executable is worth the overhead given today's hardware:
rak@zeta:/tmp$ for f in lite 256color; \
do dpkg -c rxvt-unicode-${f}_9.22-1+b3_amd64.deb | grep 'bin/urxvt$'; done
-rwxr-sr-x root/utmp 1136448 2017-07-22 02:35 ./usr/bin/urxvt
-rwxr-sr-x root/utmp 1398784 2017-07-22 02:35 ./usr/bin/urxvt
I've never had to do a multi-package transition, but I assume I'll need to
coordinate with debian-release following the same procedure as for library
transitions?
Happy holidays,
Ryan
--
|_)|_/ Ryan Kavanagh | GPG: 4E46 9519 ED67 7734 268F
| \| \ https://ryanak.ca/ | BD95 8F7B F8FC 4A11 C97A
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
