Hi, On Sun, Sep 19, 2021 at 3:11 PM Aurelien Jarno <aure...@debian.org> wrote: > > Now in the same spirit as in #993955, I am not sure you actually want to > push maintainers to move libraries from /lib to /usr/lib
The purpose of this tag was never to push people toward usr-merge. It only looks like that to glibc and libgpg-error-dev because the packages use mixed installation paths. Furthermore, the comparison with Bug#993955 is not appropriate. Filed at the extraordinary 'serious' level by a member of the release team, it was based on the filer's misunderstanding of what the tag does and when it was implemented: Introduced seven months ago as a classification tag [1] it was never shown to users. The purpose was to aid in the collection of statistics [2] that became then immediately available via the JSON interface on the Lintian website. [3] The description, too, was gentle boilerplate [4] and in line with conventional wisdom at the time. Most significantly, the tag predated the "considered harmful" thread on -devel [5] that commenced on July 15 by almost half a year. Lintian's packaging hints never contradicted the consensus now emerging—if that is what we have—either in that tag or in the 'breakout-link' tag being discussed here. Maybe 'breakout-link' is not useful and we should get rid of it, but it looks to me like we found an issue in the way libgpg-error or Pkg-config invoke Libtool. Kind regards Felix Lechner [1] https://salsa.debian.org/lintian/lintian/-/merge_requests/349#note_215066 [2] https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=978636#168 [3] https://lintian.debian.org/query [4] https://salsa.debian.org/lintian/lintian/-/blob/fe69b16048052be8ee35e0596cac7777fdcaff71/tags/u/unmerged-usr.tag [5] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2021/07/msg00126.html
