On Fri, 29 Sept 2023 at 00:42, Johannes Schauer Marin Rodrigues <jo...@debian.org> wrote: > > Hi Julien, > > thank you for your quick reply! > > Quoting Julien Cristau (2023-09-28 17:49:51) > > I guess more than mixing two different things I disagree that that is > > debootstrap's responsibility, and so I disagree that that is a valid bug. > > In > > my view it's more important for debootstrap to reliably be able to create > > chroots than some sort of philosophical purity about what is included in > > said > > chroot. Package priorities are how the archive tells debootstrap which > > packages to install, and so since I don't see your (A) as a bug, I'm saying > > if there's a bug it's (B) and belongs with the archive. > > I agree that debootstrap's reliability to create chroots is supremely > important. But do you see a bug with my change that makes it unreliable? It > changes what the chroot includes yes, but it does so in a reliable way unless > I > missed something?
Given the list of affected packages is short (and it's all about tzdata IIRC), how about we wait until that list is down to zero (and if you have time, maybe you could help with that?), and then merge this change? That way we don't add instability, and fix the issue at the same time.
