On Fri, 13 Apr 2018 10:33:54 +0100
Chris Lamb <la...@debian.org> wrote:

> tags 895597 + moreinfo
> thanks
> Hi Neil,
> > From the tag description (extended in bug #889489), it's not clear
> > to me *how* to use runuser for the requested fix and *why* using
> > runuser actually fixes the problem described in the tag  
> I can't comment on this directly, but the tag was also extended in
> #895370 which might explain a little more.

That is the same content as I've been looking at - I don't find
anything useful in that bug report on how to use runuser or why using
runuser helps the situation.

> If the *current* tag description is not helpful that is still a
> bug in Lintian, of course.
> > For now, I will have to override this warning because I see no
> > practical way to fix it.  
> Surely one can hold off on that until we get resolution here. A
> resigned "have to" seems somewhat of an excessive and unnecessary
> level of reaction, especially given the effort that has already
> gone into this already.

There are a lot of people waiting on this upstream release, a lot of
other tasks outside Debian. The upstream release can't wait for this
Debian bug to be fixed, much more important bug fixes are contained
within the upstream code.

Besides, as outlined in the original bug report, the objective here is
to document the reasoning so that a full replacement for the current
maintainer script can be designed, from scratch. The testing stage of
that development alone is expected to take several weeks. We cannot
risk that level of disruption at this stage of the upstream release

A rushed fix to the current postinst is simply unacceptable.


Neil Williams

Attachment: pgpSorPE1DWXV.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Reply via email to