fuse (2.x) and fuse3 are not coninstallable. fuse 2.x should
probably go away.

Tracking bug for this.

Hi Chris,

Should every rdep bug block this one?

Cheers,
Emilio

Hi Emilio, Laszlo,

* Emilio Pozuelo Monfort <pochu@debian.org> [251114 12:12]:

Thank you for the suggestion. They now do so.

I'm wondering if we should start bumping the severity of these bugs,
so we can remove fuse2.

Chris

That sounds reasonable, and if done early, there will be more time for
maintainers to fix the bugs.

AFAICS of the 45 remaining affected packages (ignoring sid-only packages), only
apt-cacher-ng is a key package.

Cheers,
Emilio

Let me know when you think it'd be a good time, to not disturb
something more important.

Best,
Chris

Hi,

Quick facts.
 Reason was that src:fuse and src:fuse3 both shipped the fusermount
binary for CLI interaction. That caused the package conflict and
solved in Trixie with removing this binary from src:fuse. That is, now
src:fuse (libraries only) and src:fuse3 (library and the binary) are
co-installable.
 Sounds right to me. The src:fuse support ended in January, 2019
almost seven years ago. Projects should step away from it. Those had
time, src:fuse3 is here since december, 2016 which means nine years by
now.
In short, Forky has to leave src:fuse as soon as possible.
 That sounds bad. I thought apt-cacher-ng is in development, but a
quick check shows no activity over a year, even an open security issue
affects it. :(

Regards,
Laszlo/GCS

Now would be a good time. Feel free to send an email to debian-devel with a dd-list.

Cheers,
Emilio

Hi

During one of the previous fuse3 discussions, I set up a tracker [1].

Please feel free to adapt it, or drop it if it is not useful.

Regards
Graham


[1] https://release.debian.org/transitions/html/fuse-to-fuse3.html

Thank you, the tracker is useful. I reconciled the lists and filed 5
additional bugs.

Best,
Chris