Hello Clint Adams. Sorry for the late followup but would be good to see some progress on this issue so my reply can spark some life into this.
On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 04:25:17AM +0000, Clint Adams wrote: > On Thu, Mar 24, 2016 at 12:32:53PM +0100, Andreas Henriksson wrote: > > This should solve the "debootstrapped with merged usr" case (see > > #810301) and Marco has already implemented the upgrade case in > > usrmerge 11. > > > Please review attached patch. > > I am not thrilled by the idea of duplicating every shell > in /etc/shells. Is this the only solution? I see this as the most/only practical solution and other options as more theoretical ones. Marcos reply already mentions one option I consider quite theoretical and very unpractical. Personally I don't see the point in supporting non-merged-usr in the future. On the other hand I don't want to be the one announcing we'll unconditionally switch to only supporting merged-usr to the angry mob.... Dropping support for non-merged-usr and just convert /etc/shells over on upgrades would also solve this issue I guess. So in my view this boils down to a decision for you to make: 1/ can you live with the ugliness in /etc/shells? 2/ do you want to be the one standing on the barricades for making the usrmerge package Essential: yes and that the optional non-usrmerge alternative in #810301 should be ripped out of the patch forcing new debootstraps to always be merged usr? I think the ugliness is quite minor and would certainly go for 1 myself, but I'd also envy you if you managed to go the route of 2/ and manage to get everyone to agree on it in time for stretch release! As far as I know this is one of few (possibly the only) remaining blockers for having debootstrap do merged usr by default, so would be nice to know which way we want to go here... Regards, Andreas Henriksson
