Hi, Am Sonntag, 2. Juni 2019 schrieb Justin B Rye: > Paul Gevers wrote: > > + The <systemitem role="package">ecryptfs-utils</systemitem> > > package > > + is not part of buster due to an unfixed serious bug (<ulink > > + url="&url-bts;765854">#765854</ulink>). At the time of writing > > this > > + paragraph, there wasn't a clear advice to people with > > encryptfs, > > + except not upgrading. > > Advice is a non-count noun, and "not upgrading" doesn't quite fit the > grammar either. Make it > > paragraph, there was no clear advice for users of encryptfs, > except not to upgrade. > > And I'm not sure even the non-upgrade option counts as clear advice, > but I suppose it's the nearest thing we've got.
Maybe adding something like "or migrate to <some alternative>" to the end would be helpfu? And also, I wonder if "ecryptfs-utils" (without n) and encryptfs (with n) are both correct? Holger -- Sent from my Jolla phone http://www.jolla.com/