[Pkg-zfsonlinux-devel] any news/reply regarding ZFS in NEW?

[Dimitri John Ledkov]

On 1 March 2014 15:46, Turbo Fredriksson <turbo at bayour.com> wrote:
> On Mar 1, 2014, at 2:25 PM, Robert Millan wrote:
>
>> I already explained. Nobody listens... (sigh)
>
> All I've seen is that you "think" that it "might" be a problem and that we "might" be better of renaming it...
>
>
> Please give us/me a direct link to the Debian GNU/Linux policy point that explain that this is not acceptable.

Hostile binary takeover is not allowed - that is two separate source
packages should not build the same binary package names, even if on
different architectures.

Since these are two different implementations that should be clearly
reflected in the binary package names.

There is no need to rename the command-line utilities themself.

Typically you'd still declare a common name as a virtual package name provider:
Package: zolutils
Provides: zfsutils
Description: zfs on linux utilities

The conflict is there, by virtue of enabling multiarch one can install
"zfsutils" for either a linux or kfreebsd architecutre, based on
higher version number kfreebsd one will win... thus it's in your own
interest to rename zfsutils binary package name.

Similarly you can't share library package names, since that will break
multiarch installations of those, since versions and files do not
match between kfreebsd/linux arches.

The packages that are ok, are "-dbg" "-dkms" and "-initramfs".

Also, if there is zfs-dkms module available, why existing zfsutils
packages just can't enable compilation on "linux-any"?! Which should
also reduce the scope of linux specific packages down to
-dkms/-initramfs, and maybe an arch specific patch-series.

Changes to partman-zfs on linux-any, confuse and surprise me, as that
implies providing a pre-build dmks module for the installer's Linux
kernel which is not redistributable. DId partman-zfs/linux-any relied
on compiling -dkms module? Debian has spent a long time to provide
fully free kernels, introducing a non-redistributable component into
the installer is a no-go.

-- 
Regards,

Dimitri.