usrmerge package

[Marco d'Itri]

On Aug 04, Josh Triplett <josh at joshtriplett.org> wrote:

> You might also try adding "Important: yes" to it and testing the effect
> of that in package managers (with a ping to the apt and dpkg folks to
> confirm the semantics).  As far as I know, that acts like "Essential:
> yes" in providing warnings about removing the package, except that
There is already some magic code in prerm which prevents removing the 
package in unsafe conditions.

> For similar reasons, while I'd like to see packages start to rely on
> this, for now I think it'd be appropriate to ping the lintian folks
> about adding usrmerge to their list of packages that nothing else may
> depend on.
I am not sure about this, we can always get back to this later if it 
will become a problem.

> Have you started the process of getting a Policy proposal together about
> handling everything-in-/usr (optional symlinks, etc), to point new
> packages at and to base Lintian warnings on?
I have been not dealt with the policy process in the last 15 years, so 
I hope that somebody who is more familiar with it will work on this. :-)
Also, we need a release goal proposal for everything-in-usr support.

> Consider adding a link somewhere to the BTS usertag for usrmerge bugs.
It is in README.Debian.

-- 
ciao,
Marco
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 648 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://alioth-lists.debian.net/pipermail/pkg-systemd-maintainers/attachments/20150805/59431dcf/attachment-0002.sig>