On Wed, Aug 18, 2021, at 14:01, Cyril Brulebois wrote: > T. Joseph Carter <tjcar...@spiritsubstance.com> (2021-08-18): > > It's debianutils' bug, really, and the bugs keep getting filed (and > > resolved), but there's a half a dozen packages on my system that are > > broken by it. Yours happens to be used at boot time and for general > > system operation. > > It's an ongoing conversation on IRC apparently, and yes, some kind of > advance warning would have been appreciated.
Ohhhh yes, I'm sure there is. I've missed those over the years. 🍿 > That being said, it's not entirely crazy to attempt such changes very > early in the release cycle, and if we ought to move away from those > tools, I don't mind much. Yes, but you "try" to do that by marking the packages deprecated and filing bugs that version 5, due out X weeks, and ask them to make changes or allow NMU. Ideally, you then keep it around for a release or so AFTER you make Debian no longer dependent upon the tools. Dunno who else would miss tempfile, but I'm kinda partial to which since command -v will NOT give you the path to a file if you typically alias that file, and type -P is not POSIX and does not work with dash. > > If you're busy and debianutils' change doesn't get reverted, I can > > prepare a patch. It's literally replacing tempfile and which with > > their more generic equivalents, after all. > > I think we'd be happy to have a patch or a merge request to review, even > more so if you've tested it on a real system. > > The git repo is at: > https://salsa.debian.org/installer-team/cdebconf/ > > but a patch against the source package would be fine too. > > Thanks for the heads-up! Presumably /installer-team/console-setup would be a better package to patch, unless cdebconf uses tempfile somehow. 😉 I'll see what I can do this evening. 🙂 Joseph
