On 17/05/15 14:55, Jaret Cantu wrote:
> On 05/17/2015 09:20 AM, David Hare wrote:
>> The problem is: installing "eudev" in init.d because it provides
>> "udev" which already exists. Installing the dummy udev (needed to
>> satisfy deps of other packages) does not remove existing conffiles.
>>
>> At least, with the way I did it, which I'm not saying is necessarily
>> the best.
>
> I certainly know my way isn't the best: laziness~!
>
> I looked into finding a way to make eudev provide the udev packages
> elegantly and instead went with the stupid approach of "Everything eudev
> now!" I mean, there is no such thing as libeudev, right?
>
> Everything is still just named udev, after all, so I can justify my
> sloth at least a little.

Here, every package is named "eudev". (except the dummies).. set your
debian/ like mine and "libeudev1" gets built along with a dummy
libudev1. Same goes for libgeudev-1.0-0 et al.

> Hmm, looking at the "init" package, a "Pre-Depends: eudev |
> systemd-udev" in a udev dummy package is probably the way to go. Or
> maybe that only works for sysvinit since its conffiles are in a separate
> package.

That failed (my build) because "eudev" itself depends on the dummy udev
(because the initscript problem).

> Here's some food for thought: https://wiki.debian.org/ConfigPackages
>
>
> Too little sleep and too little coffee to worry about this right now.
> Devuan didn't happen to defect any legit former Debian maintainers who
> are a bit better with this sort of arcana, did it?

We can do it without them! Nearly there.