On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 08:31:47PM +0200, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > On Wed, 27 Aug 2008, Santiago Vila wrote: > > On Wed, 27 Aug 2008, Raphael Hertzog wrote: > > > However the symlink should point to ubuntu if base-files is built on > > > Ubuntu and to debian if built on Debian. [...] > > > > Hmm, first it is suggested that this is done in base-files because it > > is easier to fork, but then a procedure is described in which no fork > > is even necessary, except for a "bootstrap". > > Forking is always needed to add the new file in "origins".
With my Ubuntu hat on (as a frequent uploader of both base-files and dpkg there): * Modulo a few tweaks, I think Raphaƫl's origins work is fantastic and will adopt it like a shot as soon as it's convenient to do so (i.e. it's in Debian and we're at a suitable point in our release cycle for a new major version of dpkg). * While there's still some work to do, there is considerable promise for this to allow us to use an entirely unpatched dpkg (perhaps throwing away a few relatively unimportant things in our diff that haven't mattered so long as we had to carry a big diff anyway). As such, I agree that it would be convenient for this to be in base-files rather than in dpkg. * I very definitely prefer the default vendor change to be an explicit change in base-files' source, rather than being implicit based on the system on which base-files was built. That's much clearer and is an insignificant cost for us. I have no particular opinion on any particular way of creating that symlink, although I would find it a little bit surprising if a user "sidegraded" from Debian to Ubuntu or vice-versa and found that their entire system changed *except* for /etc/dpkg/origins/default. Thanks, -- Colin Watson [cjwat...@ubuntu.com] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-bugs-dist-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org