On 2024-07-28 at 10:13, Michael Kjörling wrote: > On 28 Jul 2024 15:08 +0200, from er...@rail.eu.org (Erwan David): >> Le 28/07/2024 à 14:28, allan a écrit : >>> I would agree with you *if* the change had been publicized. >> >> [...] But in my view it is a bug to remove something else than the >> symlink even with the same name > > At the risk of repeating myself from elsewhere lately on this > mailing list. > > This whole thread is about Debian _Unstable_. > > Unstable can be EXACTLY what it says on the tin. _Sid breaks toys._ > When Unstable breaks, as the saying goes, you get to keep both > pieces. (The value of having regular backups is not restricted to > those running Unstable.)
FWIW: I'm running testing, not unstable, and I already have the procps change. I'm not sure I ever had the systemd-suite package which included the symlink in question, but I do remember having the systemd-suite changelog entry in question appear - via apt-list-changes - in upgrades that I've already installed (although I'm not finding it now when I look in my local changelogs). Some parts of this, at least, aren't just in sid. -- The Wanderer The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man. -- George Bernard Shaw
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
