On 2021-07-20 Guillem Jover <guil...@debian.org> wrote: > On Mon, 2021-07-19 at 16:41:42 +0200, Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues wrote: >> So what what is actually the roadmap after the bullseye release? >> What is the way forward? Should I rather file bugs with patches >> against individual packages to move their files from >> /(sbin|bin|lib)/ to /usr/(sbin|bin|lib)/ or do we already have a >> debhelper patch to do that move for us?
> Unfortunately, when the supporters of the merged-/usr-via-aliased-dirs > pushed their approach into the distribution, that meant that package > stopped being able to ship compatibility symlinks under «/», and those > needed to be "handled" in maintscripts (by reimplementing poorly and > unsafely what dpkg is supposed to do). This means dpkg is not in the > loop and cannot perform a safe upgrade moving these pathnames safely, > as long as merged-/usr-via-aliased-dirs is supported. [...] Hello, Isn't this kind of crying over spilt milk? I also wish we never had ended up with the buster/bullseye state where both unmerged and merged-/usr-via-aliased-dirs are fully supported. However there is now a huge number of merged-/usr-via-aliased-dirs installations out there and we cannot make them magically disappear. Undoing merged-/usr-via-aliased-dirs would be very error-prone while afaiui we have a relatively simple plan to get a clean merged /usr in bookworm or bookworm +1: 1. Make merged-/usr-via-aliased-dirs the only supported layout and make this information available to apt. (Like we did for multi-arch-support.) 2. After that individual packages can safely move files from / to /usr, pre-depending on merged-usr-support. cu Andreas -- `What a good friend you are to him, Dr. Maturin. His other friends are so grateful to you.' `I sew his ears on from time to time, sure'
