On Sun, 2021-08-22 at 19:10 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > Luca Boccassi <bl...@debian.org> writes: > > On Sun, 2021-08-22 at 07:45 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote: > > > > This is already the case. Policy 10.1: > > > > To support merged-/usr systems, packages must not install files in > > > both /path and /usr/path. For example, a package must not install both > > > /bin/example and /usr/bin/example. > > > Thank you - is that intended to mean "the same package", or "any two > > packages"? Ie, is foo2 allowed to install /bin/foo if foo1 installs > > /usr/bin/foo or is that RC-buggy too? > > I don't think we have an explicit statement that you can't do this because > I'm not sure it's come up, but it's obviously not a safe thing to do (and > that was true long before usrmerge was even considered).
Thank you - it has been brought up in this thread as an example of a valid setup, so if it is not, I think it could be good to be extra clear in the policy? How about the following: To support merged-\ ``/usr`` systems, packages must not install files in both ``/path`` and ``/usr/path``. For example, a package must not install -both ``/bin/example`` and ``/usr/bin/example``. +both ``/bin/example`` and ``/usr/bin/example``. Also, package ``example-b`` +cannot install ``/bin/example`` if package ``example-a`` already installs +``/usr/bin/example``, and viceversa. -- Kind regards, Luca Boccassi
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
