On 4/26/13 8:57 AM, Phil Blundell wrote:
On Thu, 2013-04-25 at 08:47 -0500, Mark Hatle wrote:
Is this a problem that they should have used the update-alternatives for
sulogin? (Sounds like it might be a security issue though...) This would avoid
the .debug conflict.
I dunno. It seems a bit sad to force use of update-alternatives just to
deconflict the .debug data (since the binaries in question would never
be installed at the same time anyway), and in general it seems like we
want less update-alternatives rather than more of it.
But I guess that would indeed solve the problem and it's probably the
lowest-effort thing that does. So maybe that's the way ahead.
The alternative of course is to crease special -dbg packages for the two
conflicting items. I.e. foo-dbg, foo-sulogin-dbg, bar-dbg and bar-sulogin-dbg...
--Mark
p.
_______________________________________________
Openembedded-core mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
