Hi cacin,
I see that you are working on merging /bin and /sbin, for instance via
brltty bug #1064785. Again Fedora is pioneering this matter and their
documentation is at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Unify_bin_and_sbin.
Please allow me to push back on this one as well by raising a few
c
Hi Helmut,
On Wed, 2024-02-28 at 07:41 +0100, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> I see that you are working on merging /bin and /sbin, for instance
> via
> brltty bug #1064785. Again Fedora is pioneering this matter and their
> documentation is at
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Unify_bin_and_sbin.
On Feb 28, Helmut Grohne wrote:
> Please allow me to push back on this one as well by raising a few
> concerns.
Also, I think that the benefits from doing this are tiny, and just
adding /usr/sbin/ to the $PATH would solve almost everything.
--
ciao,
Marco
signature.asc
Description: PGP signa
On 28/02/24 12:25, Ansgar 🙀 wrote:
 This can be good, but it can also be seen as a pollution of
your shell completion. I note that Fedora seems to have added /sbin to
the user $PATH by default, which is not what Debian has done. I do not
think we have consensus on this and would raise an objectio
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Edward Betts
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, debian-pyt...@lists.debian.org
* Package name: python-usb-devices
Version : 0.4.5
Upstream Author : J. Nick Koston
* URL : https://github.com/bluetooth-devices/usb-device
A few thigns I have seen in this thread:
Fedora/Arch/Whomever: I don't think it matters who thought of what first.
Sometimes, it's okay to be different. I have moved all of my systems away from
Slackware and Fedora/RedHat/etc. TO Debian because I think Debian does it
better. Please do not t
On 28/02/24 14:12, rhys wrote:
Last thing: The idea of detecting cases where multiple binaries have the same name is a
verey good one. It should also be possible to automate this effort in a number of ways.
I would be happy to help with this, if it's just a matter of someone putting in the
Are any of these (like arping) literally duplicates of the same binary for some
reason? Or are they true conflicts (different binaries with the same name)?
--J
Sent from my mobile device.
From: Gioele Barabucci
Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2024 08:22
To: debian
On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 08:47:48AM -0600, r...@neoquasar.org wrote:
> > From: Gioele Barabucci
> > Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2024 08:22
> > To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> > Subject: Re: On merging bin and sbin
> >
> > On 28/02/24 14:12, rhys wrote:
> > > Last thing:Â The idea of detecti
On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 08:47:48AM -0600, r...@neoquasar.org wrote:
> Are any of these (like arping) literally duplicates of the same binary for
> some reason? Or are they true conflicts (different binaries with the same
> name)?
arping is definitely not a duplicate, iputils-arping and arping are
On 28/02/24 19:08, Peter Pentchev wrote:
On Wed, Feb 28, 2024 at 08:47:48AM -0600, r...@neoquasar.org wrote:
From: Gioele Barabucci
This is a quick'n'dirty list of binaries present in both /bin and /sbin:
arping bin net/iputils-arping sbin net/arping (+ Conflicts:)
Are any of these (like ar
Package: wnpp
Severity: wishlist
Owner: Mathias Gibbens
X-Debbugs-CC: debian-devel@lists.debian.org, debian...@lists.debian.org
* Package name: golang-github-muhlemmer-httpforwarded
Version : 0.1.0-1
Upstream Author : Tim Möhlmann
* URL : https://github.com/muhlemmer/h
I know the time_t transition is in progress but there could have been a
nicer experience for users on unstable:
Feb 29 10:31:30 ripley systemd[914]: Starting at-spi-dbus-bus.service -
Accessibility services bus...
Feb 29 10:31:30 ripley at-spi-bus-laun[984]: Cannot get the default
GSettingsSch
See bug #1064349.
I think the problem (correct me if I am wrong!) is that the postinst -
debian/amavisd-new.postinst - does (simplified):
=== cut ===
#DEBHELPER#
case "$1" in
configure)
# configure file permissions to use new amavis user
...
esac
=== cut ===
This means that #DE
On Thu, Feb 29, 2024 at 11:12:27AM +1100, Brian May wrote:
> See bug #1064349.
>
> I think the problem (correct me if I am wrong!) is that the postinst -
> debian/amavisd-new.postinst - does (simplified):
>
> === cut ===
> #DEBHELPER#
>
> case "$1" in
> configure)
> # configure file
On Wed, 2024-02-28 at 20:20 +0100, Julian Andres Klode wrote:
> APT 2.7.13 just landed in unstable and with GnuPG 2.4.5 installed,
> or 2.4.4 with a backport from the 2.4 branch, requires repositories
> to be signed using one of
>
> - RSA keys of at least 2048 bit
> - Ed25519
> - Ed448
>
> Any ot
Package: libglib2.0-0t64
Version: 2.78.4-2
Severity: critical
Justification: breaks unrelated software
X-Debbugs-Cc: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
Hey.
CCing d-d since there seems some further deeper problem with the t64
transition (namely lib files getting lost, when "downgrading" i.e.
revertin
Hi,
On 29-02-2024 4:47 a.m., Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
@d-d:
- How can it happen that purge *t64 packages and at the same time install
the previous package, and then the so file is missing?
I mean it's clear that they use the same name, but shouldn't DPKG handle
the cleanly?
Wel
On Thu, Feb 29, 2024 at 06:53:56AM +0100, Paul Gevers wrote:
> On 29-02-2024 4:47 a.m., Christoph Anton Mitterer wrote:
> > @d-d:
> > - How can it happen that purge *t64 packages and at the same time install
> >the previous package, and then the so file is missing?
> >I mean it's clear that
Hi
On 2/29/24 14:57, Steve Langasek wrote:
Furthermore, this is a downgrade from a replacing package to a replaced
package. Unless you also --reinstall the package at the end, missing files
are quite to be expected.
I wonder if this could be improved -- e.g. by ignoring Replaces:
relationshi
20 matches
Mail list logo
