On Thu, 12 Jul 2012 09:47:33 -0400 Ian Stakenvicius <a...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA256 > > On 12/07/12 03:17 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > > On Thu, 12 Jul 2012 13:01:21 +0800 Ben de Groot <yng...@gentoo.org> > > wrote: > > > >> On 12 July 2012 07:42, William Hubbs <willi...@gentoo.org> > >> wrote: > >>> On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 10:57:42PM +0200, Diego Elio Pettenò > >>> wrote: > >>>> Il 11/07/2012 21:11, William Hubbs ha scritto: > >>>>> I am about to release udev-186-r1, which will move > >>>>> everything currently in /lib/udev to /usr/lib/udev. > >>>> > >>>> Unless you're going to establish a symlink, please keep it > >>>> under p.mask until everything is using some common code — > >>>> otherwise things _will_ break. > >>> > >>> Since multiple packages put things in /lib/udev, I'm not sure > >>> it is possible to establish a symlink from /lib/udev to > >>> /usr/lib/udev if that's what you mean; I'll look into it > >>> though. > >> > >> Couldn't you, on udev upgrade, move everything in /lib/udev to > >> /usr/lib/udev, and then make the symlink? Seems fairly simple to > >> me, but maybe I'm overlooking something? > > > > You are overlooking conflicts introduced through moving files > > without updating vardb. > > > > There were no vdb issues when baselayout-1 was migrated to > baselayout-2, and it rewrote a whackload of stuff iirc... > > Updating vdb shouldn't be an issue here, as long as pkg_postinst > doesn't crash mid-stream. Is the vdb common between package managers > or does each one have a different solution? Yes, it is common because for many years people keep noticing it is common and using that. In other words, for many there is a failing attempt to stop relying on its format. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
