Bug#542170: Bug#470398: Bug#542170: 10_linux: please implement alternative options

[Colin Watson]

On Tue, May 05, 2020 at 06:56:02AM +0200, Marc Haber wrote:
> On Mon, May 04, 2020 at 12:23:18PM +0100, Colin Watson wrote:
> > This sort of thing *really* needs to go upstream first, otherwise we can
> > easily end up with even more catastrophically complicated compatibility
> > code.  I've commented in the merge proposal to that effect.
> 
> Did you look at the diff between Debian's 10_linux and upstrem's
> 10_linux recently?

I'm familiar with it, but:

 (1) that's not by itself a free pass to add more

 (2) when I said "even more catastrophically complicated", that was
     specifically pointing out that we already have a lot of additions
     and that that's a problem

 (3) several of those changes have been through specific efforts to try
     to make them upstreamable, and some have been sent upstream, so
     it's not just a blithe free-for-all even if the situation is more
     complex than I'd like

 (4) most of those changes don't add new external interfaces in the
     sense of new variables in /etc/default/grub
     (GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX_RECOVERY and GRUB_RECOVERY_TITLE are
     exceptions, it's true, but they're much less complex than what you
     propose - for example they don't involve re-sourcing
     /etc/default/grub*, which is probably an unworkable implementation
     given the strange things that can be done in /etc/default/grub.d/)

 (5) sarcasm isn't a persuasive line of argument

-- 
Colin Watson                                       [cjwatson at debian.org]