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 <gentoo-dev+bounces-50919-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
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 <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 11 Apr 2012 05:18:39 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by obbwd20 with SMTP id wd20so910681obb.40
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; 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 <w.d.hubbs@gmail.com>
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 <williamh@gentoo.org>
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>
<CAGfcS_mLRBCEuvs2gQu8Ov9XD2MoKmFjCn+giLFsLLnvikoYOw@mail.gmail.com>
<jlv8e2$fdj$1@dough.gmane.org>
<4F833687.4040004@gentoo.org>
<jm2q2o$4n7$1@dough.gmane.org>
<4F8503DF.1010802@gentoo.org>
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
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--