Ivan J. wrote on 20/10/17 10:57:
> On Fri, 20 Oct 2017, Daniel Reurich wrote:
>
>> On 20/10/17 09:54, Ivan J. wrote:
>>> On Thu, 19 Oct 2017, KatolaZ wrote:
>>> [snip]
>>>> - ACTION: @everybody test the proposed eudev packages, to check that
>>>> they work in all possible update/upgrade scenarios:
>>>> - Debian/Wheezy -> Devuan/Jessie
>>>> - Debian/Jessie -> Devuan/Jessie
>>>> - Devuan/Jessie -> Devuan/Ascii
>>>> - Debian/Stretch -> Devuan/Ascii
>>>> - Devuan/Ascii -> Devuan/Ceres
>>>
>>> For this one we should reconsider and talk to tremon about testing his
>>> version with epoch 1:. The sources are on his gitlab profile:
>>> https://git.devuan.org/tremon/eudev
>>....
>> There is no reason to set an epoch at all.
>>
>> the package should not build or ship libudev... but libeudev and have:
>> "Provides: libudev1 (=<libudev version>)
>> "Replaces: libudev1
>>
>> This allows a drop in replacement for libudev without the name conflict
>> and provides a seemless transition to eudev.
>
> I seriously don't prefer renaming it to libeudev. But if everyone else
> wants to, and reaches consensus, I will merge the patch you can come up
> with.
Interesting. I don't see the contention point, but I do see the
advantage of having a different name from the package shipped with udev.
Perhaps a different new name? libudev-eudev? I'm happy enough with
libeudev (although it takes a bit of squinting to see that it's a
different name than libudev) Or anything else other than libudev, which
in my mind is already taken.
Ralph.
::
Re: [devuan-dev] Actions from last …
