Hi Gerrit, On Thu, 18 Jun 2015 at 11:23:04 +0000, Gerrit Pape wrote: > Thanks for the help. I'd be happy to have the initramfs functionality > split out and maintained separately. If a binary/service split is > necessary, I'd prefer to have a "dropbear" package with the binaries, > and a "dropbear-run" package with the service.
As I mentioned when answering [0] Simon earlier in this thread, the downside of reusing the “dropbear” name (without an explicit Depends: dropbear-initramfs) is that users might brick their system when upgrading. Would you find Adam's solution [1] acceptable, i.e. make “dropbear” a transitional package depending on both “dropbear-run” (service) and “dropbear-initramfs”, which both in turn depend on “dropbear-bin” (binaries). As Adam noted, the “dropbear” name would be available again in Buster. > Unfortunately I cannot support you, but don't hesitate to NMU the > dropbear package to be able to proceed. Will do, thanks. This will also be the occasion to upgrade to 2015.67 [2] :-) -- Guilhem. [0] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2015/06/msg00000.html [1] https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2015/06/msg00001.html [2] https://matt.ucc.asn.au/dropbear/CHANGES
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
