Please don’t understand me wrong, I’m not against a sensible solution out of this mess, but I’m very much against just saying this package “should not exist” without one. (I also intend to actually fork the upstream part and hack on it, low pace though and mostly small fixes.)
I don’t have much time right now (got to go), but I’ve got a better idea than this: >that package is in much less health and should perhaps be replaced >by a transitional package instead. How about starting a sort of transition to the split packages instead? • upload rng-tools 2-unofficial-mt.14-2 to buster-proposed-updates (since, due to the version number, it cannot go via unstable), unchanged from 2-unofficial-mt.14-1 except for a NEWS entry saying: “This is the last 2.x version of rng-tools. If you wish to continue using it, perhaps if you rely on the new command line options this version has over rng-tools5, please migrate to the rng-tools-debian package, also available in buster, instead. If you do so, copy your configuration settings from /etc/default/rng-tools over to the new file /etc/default/rng-tools-debian after installing the new package. “If you have newer or high-bandwidth HWRNGs or just wish to follow Debian defaults, migrate to the package rng-tools5, also available in buster, instead. Please note that it does not use a file under /etc/defaults/ to configure. “If you do nothing, your version of rng-tools will be replaced with rng-tools5 automatically in bullseye.” • keep rng-tools5 and rng-tools-debian in testing • after buster, drop src:rng-tools and move the binary package rng-tools to the rng-tools5 source package as transitional package, as announced in the above-mentioned NEWS ⇒ this will cause the least breakage or surprise to users, retain version numbers that are actually meaningful, and start a proper, two-release, transition *and* ensure that people know about the configuration files I’d be willing to try to coordinate this (also with the release team since we have to go via p-u). Please do tell me what you think, but *do* refrain from taking hasty actions (even though we need to get this settled within ten days or so). Thanks in advance, //mirabilos -- Solange man keine schmutzigen Tricks macht, und ich meine *wirklich* schmutzige Tricks, wie bei einer doppelt verketteten Liste beide Pointer XORen und in nur einem Word speichern, funktioniert Boehm ganz hervorragend. -- Andreas Bogk über boehm-gc in d.a.s.r
