On Sat, Feb 21, 2026 at 08:34:19PM +0100, Joost van Baal-Ilić wrote: > A, makes sense; thanks for this explanation. I'll wait for Jan Mojžíš's > opinion: he's done most of the work on the daemontools packaging.
Great! If Jan agrees in principle then before committing the change I think it is worth thinking about what the best user experience would be for grouping the tools together. Pros for bunching them together + easier to switch in or out the whole bank + slightly less boilerplate in dh_installalternatives control files Pros for tool-by-tool alternatives * handles incomplete suport (e.g. chpst cannot yet [1] emulate fghack) * lets more packages with varying range of tools join in the fun, e.g. s6. * avoid confusion of needing one arbitrary tool to be the 'main' one I have a hunch it might be best to do this on a tool-by-tool basis. I don't mind reworking the patch if this is desired. [1] https://github.com/g-pape/runit/pull/23
