From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from mail.pbcl.net ([88.198.119.4] helo=hetzner.pbcl.net)
	by linuxtogo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <pb@pbcl.net>)
	id 1UVjQn-0004Ex-Ei for openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org;
	Fri, 26 Apr 2013 16:15:24 +0200
Received: from cpc6-cmbg17-2-0-cust487.5-4.cable.virginmedia.com
	([86.30.57.232] helo=[172.30.1.45])
	by hetzner.pbcl.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32)
	(Exim 4.72) (envelope-from <pb@pbcl.net>)
	id 1UVj9e-0006EN-46; Fri, 26 Apr 2013 15:57:38 +0200
Message-ID: <1366984657.14512.108.camel@phil-desktop.brightsign>
From: Phil Blundell <pb@pbcl.net>
To: Mark Hatle <mark.hatle@windriver.com>
Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 14:57:37 +0100
In-Reply-To: <517933DC.9080809@windriver.com>
References: <1349169606.32611.73.camel@phil-desktop>
	<1349176346.15753.139.camel@ted>
	<1349176541.32611.80.camel@phil-desktop>
	<1349177925.15753.140.camel@ted>
	<1366888374.14512.78.camel@phil-desktop.brightsign>
	<517933DC.9080809@windriver.com>
X-Mailer: Evolution 3.4.4-1 
Mime-Version: 1.0
Cc: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] rootfs_ipk, image: Add debug capture support
X-BeenThere: openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11
Precedence: list
List-Id: Patches and discussions about the oe-core layer
	<openembedded-core.lists.openembedded.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/openembedded-core>,
	<mailto:openembedded-core-request@lists.openembedded.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.linuxtogo.org/pipermail/openembedded-core>
List-Post: <mailto:openembedded-core@lists.openembedded.org>
List-Help: <mailto:openembedded-core-request@lists.openembedded.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.linuxtogo.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core>,
	<mailto:openembedded-core-request@lists.openembedded.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 26 Apr 2013 14:15:31 -0000
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

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.

p.