On Thu, Aug 29, 2024 at 2:56 PM László Böszörményi (GCS) <g...@debian.org> wrote: > On Sun, Aug 25, 2024 at 11:14 PM Chris Hofstaedtler <z...@debian.org> wrote: > > Yeah, I agree. Do you want to upload a new src:fuse package dropping > > the fuse binary package? > > fuse3 already Provides: fuse, so that should be fine. > The question is, how many dependent packages use the binaries from > the fuse package or just depend on it. Sure, fuse3 provides fuse but > the names of the binaries are different. For example scripts need to > update fusermount call to fusermount3 call. As such, it might be > better to ping maintainers of those packages about dropping the fuse > binary for testing their packages first. Then after a month actually > drop it.
On the other hand, I've read reports of people breaking their systems because they install fuse which uninstalls fuse3 (perhaps because they are trying to install libfuse2 to get AppImages to work or perhaps because fuse is a generic name). So I'd rather we got rid of the old fuse binary package quicker. https://launchpad.net/bugs/1978310 Although I guess it would be a lot of work to fix that for Debian 12. :( Thank you, Jeremy Bícha
