On Mon, Jun 01, 2015 at 03:52:55AM +0200, Guilhem Moulin wrote: > On Sat, 30 May 2015 at 11:39:31 +0100, Simon McVittie wrote: > > So in this case you might have: > > * dropbear-bin (executable, private libraries if any) > > * dropbear (init integration goo) Depends: dropbear-bin > > * dropbear-initramfs Depends: dropbear-bin, Suggests: dropbear > > Makes sense indeed, thanks for the tip. Another issue is that users > might miss the split when upgrading the ‘dropbear’ package, and be left > with an unbootable system. Would a debconf warning with priority > critical be enough to tell them that they might want to install > ‘dropbear-initramfs’ as well?
Or perhaps, make 'dropbear' a transitional package that depends on both dropbear-daemon and dropbear-initramfs. This would make upgrades safe, without any debconf warnings that might not be received and/or read. If you're attached to the nonqualified name, you would be able to use it for non-transitional purposes again in buster. -- // If you believe in so-called "intellectual property", please immediately // cease using counterfeit alphabets. Instead, contact the nearest temple // of Amon, whose priests will provide you with scribal services for all // your writing needs, for Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory prices. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: https://lists.debian.org/20150601102517.ga6...@angband.pl
