On Thu, Aug 22, 2024 at 01:48:30PM +0200, Petter Reinholdtsen wrote: > [Chris Hofstaedtler] > > b) there is no direct replacement for it that would take care of > > replacing the binary packages on a default install. > > Which properties are you looking for in such direct replacement? I > could adjust isenkram-cli if it make sense, to match such properties.
The point of this bug was to get rid of the packages, not to additionally introduce new ones. Thus a replacement would have to `Conflicts:` + `Replaces:` the existing packages, _and_ also already be on most systems. Adding new packages which are used by few people is IMO a non-starter. So we could clearly have, lets say, base-files Conflicts:+Replaces: the packages, but that seems a distant solution in a far away package that can break in ways we don't want. Making the existing packages empty, including ensuring they clean up the conffiles, would leave systems in an almost clean state, which is also harmless. If the packages end up being overridden to section `oldlibs`, the existing instructions in the manual should also be good for cleaning them up for users that care enough. What I want is that we do the right thing by default for most users, without them having to do stuff additionally. Best, Chris
