From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1SHpy1-0001hX-VF for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 05:19:42 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 67CEAE0E41; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 05:19:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ob0-f181.google.com (mail-ob0-f181.google.com [209.85.214.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD1A8E0D24 for ; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 05:18:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: by obbwd20 with SMTP id wd20so910681obb.40 for ; Tue, 10 Apr 2012 22:18:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references :mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=f9uQRoMoEy0dnp9L/xrJnfbPW5OYXhDhA22lE9YcSgM=; b=N27NQU5RncruWAk7s1o0kKVOmvxQUONtKleBC3o8OW7ezJWh4KDYjsu4i1HzozKWa5 IECjcChcdvkvLF+nQfr2AgA4az+mxOFf7+4hC1buq0yWJQPJy1URM/QYXcpBj/jg/du6 ofuC2YlgnjQ2zx1gGE6eyTCD/DjWGuI1eZlPaBZTaa/e7HlT7IDmwRD5Vw1gdtyXWr0v zWdcjW3+IH728F4Mbj9lpNFdB+7mJUQ0lh308AkyWLCqPNqoJGLbFp8FO4K/d+CAeyVo NM5qp/s3YXt9CtwXvQOj8sfMUXmwNk8DtdQjSm1sWt2QUJi2gpwS7TUUo7rvsgJjHOyP Lr2Q== Received: by 10.60.20.3 with SMTP id j3mr20581665oee.43.1334121519112; Tue, 10 Apr 2012 22:18:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from linux1 (cpe-76-187-77-158.tx.res.rr.com. [76.187.77.158]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id vp14sm1572456oeb.5.2012.04.10.22.18.37 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Tue, 10 Apr 2012 22:18:38 -0700 (PDT) Sender: William Hubbs Received: by linux1 (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Wed, 11 Apr 2012 00:18:36 -0500 Date: Wed, 11 Apr 2012 00:18:36 -0500 From: William Hubbs To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] Council meeting summary for 3 April 2012 Message-ID: <20120411051836.GA11133@linux1> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <20353.41193.129711.306663@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de> <20120408220422.GA26440@kroah.com> <4F833687.4040004@gentoo.org> <4F8503DF.1010802@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="W/nzBZO5zC0uMSeA" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <4F8503DF.1010802@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Archives-Salt: f99ba80f-493e-4481-9dd7-381c866fddda X-Archives-Hash: 9c81492d2b732178eda289cc2e4e61a5 --W/nzBZO5zC0uMSeA Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 09:09:03PM -0700, Zac Medico wrote: > On 04/10/2012 07:28 PM, Steven J Long wrote: > > I suppose you could script that, but again, it just seems like a lot of > > bother to implement an "alternative" that doesn't actually gain anything > > over the traditional setup (plus making sure that partitions are mounted > > before udev starts.) >=20 > At least in the case of udev, we gain from not having to maintain a fork. >=20 > > As for the burden of ensuring that binaries installed to /{s,}bin don't= link > > to libs in /usr, why not just automate a QA check for that, and let > > developers decide whether a fix is necessary? After all, core packages = that > > do that even when configured with prefix and execprefix =3D /, aren't so > > portable, and Gentoo has always championed "doing the right thing" wrt > > helping upstream fix portability issues. >=20 > If the relevant ebuild developers really want to support that, it's fine= =20 > I guess. Hopefully that won't involve using static links as workarounds= =20 > for cross-/usr dependencies. Another issue to consider is binaries that want to access things in /usr/share/*. If a binary in /{bin,sbin} needs to access something in /usr/share/*, you have two choices. move the binary to /usr or move the thing it wants to access to / somewhere which would involve creating /share. Actually there is another choice, but I don't want to go there. That would be writing patches. The best way to solve all cross / - /usr dependencies imo is the /usr merge (moving everything from /{bin,sbin,lib*} to the counterparts in /usr), which has been discussed pretty extensively on this list, and there hasn't been a lot of opposition to it. William --W/nzBZO5zC0uMSeA Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.17 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAk+FFCwACgkQblQW9DDEZTi0zACeMSrG5+0qqDfCi4RIlXdr19jH D2UAn3zQ+KAIJY5HV730h5kexwpJB/xm =opsb -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --W/nzBZO5zC0uMSeA--