On Fri, Jul 20, 2018 at 10:47:02AM +0200, Marco d'Itri wrote:
On Jul 20, Philipp Kern <pk...@debian.org> wrote:
I think it's odd to say "here, I'm packaging up a replacement for your
library, but I'm not going to coordinate with you" when we are preparing
a (somewhat) coherent distribution, so I don't think that option should
be discarded. (Unless you have a reasonable worry that you experiment
will fail and hence don't want to bother people, I guess.)
At this point it is not an experiment anymore since Fedora switched and
removal from glibc is still planned for a future release.
I just wanted to have something usable and working before starting to
discuss a transition plan.
For purely testing purposes you could rely on a local diversion.
(Install as a different library name, divert libcrypt, symlink.) Or you
just build the package with the final names and force the conflicts. But
the usable and working version demands a coordinated libc package.
Mike Stone
