From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F3B8759CAF for ; Sun, 10 Apr 2016 00:38:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CDC7821C09D; Sun, 10 Apr 2016 00:38:13 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mout.kundenserver.de (mout.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.187]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4CA6521C02F for ; Sun, 10 Apr 2016 00:38:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.6.147] ([91.125.237.217]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (mreue004) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LkkrY-1bPDcc1Agu-00aSC6 for ; Sun, 10 Apr 2016 02:38:10 +0200 Message-ID: <5709A062.4010800@iee.org> Date: Sun, 10 Apr 2016 01:37:54 +0100 From: "M. J. Everitt" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.6.0 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 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] usr merge References: <57087E0D.3090502@gmail.com> <20160409053230.GA16529@waltdnes.org> <20160409160938.GA17530@waltdnes.org> <20160409194943.GA1271@ca.inter.net> <20160409225049.GA1276@ca.inter.net> <570995fe.44c7b60a.fb125.6a14@mx.google.com> In-Reply-To: <570995fe.44c7b60a.fb125.6a14@mx.google.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 OpenPGP: id=93C22371 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="bSIR5H9iidgI8Fo53CgnO7emJJsxvPrhj" X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:7iR/BEUbeuVfNsOAnlh0dOGN8efSuJgthECI4R4kolw5NaqCsKz wegbS4iG4fnnahtgYD6U0MlQaC5gV291nRBWqK8mHL9/eyV5TYnVU1BWFBV+PDZnWSGXmTf PgG5kLafCKBrTI9nhP8Bb8W+zYTxzKzqPmTMlyTj7jCdRdZlGkd5qXz5fUhVu86xBumSnUy UPIkykemBlnYzLPIHGODA== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:O8bBqSXC5Lk=:7bnB/BUbPhG760wag+QEC4 lkF33/pqIkuyXBN1BnzbY7HA2MRvPeg9e17VnsZOoG3hD/M0BQh5mSwQsm4XtDL0A7cs1vSic TO4VCL7NOSp5QomXcUIydpZ2h41GONyWpeaQ9kfiWY4LowgLISUFW72UB9sgvloUD9W2cUQK2 RD5BJ0yMwYsWfHe2r/4Cdjk0/vVokOE/m1pQSp//JjPHqYOAe/rTf6QUvBphGFuh1dABW3X4q fwly6Kx3puBW+shUfRgSjSex1FQW67u0YddNeLNuN+BtUqTaFwDzYtiQuUZytc7o2ucG+9MoC KOR1cPzgIPdk/7sa1O24tJ6GpMbfgUXYLbUJhxTSGU/kCUNegmYtZOChZ7uP9I0OVrQ7wCIND ahLuB9gJ4F8Mi5FARfFeK9FOmL6TiEcuAIkbOgnq1tKkvp61bXTbIEsG5BncrdVobNgPepdbj aS4XTkQ98S8vVvfu9zY2bGv/Ic2rXJ520h8omCFytk81eQli+xh2OZYRl1ac3AiSbKuYyUY1C yFQ5SYNlBdXbVJZqUpAhgU8/i8+3FupWPsc73fJ1YC7UlrAqqMS7B9BS6/YsRrRxk4G7s1uSR x5dfxzMq1WOR5Tn1vlI4tDExEFSUOMTylZfj3ZGYpCT1N6NClGvJtJkhaMHEQ7GDdYrWqgRoz uYbHgkdmnT/bOT4Vz1BbHmuAZLKM5HurjodgwJuRdKW2/QJ/FiuGGduTy4YYGUnPxJZQ= X-Archives-Salt: 67fb35b5-9571-40d5-99a9-71be20d892e3 X-Archives-Hash: a482531eba584f6188114a7786760925 This is an OpenPGP/MIME signed message (RFC 4880 and 3156) --bSIR5H9iidgI8Fo53CgnO7emJJsxvPrhj Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 10/04/16 00:53, William Hubbs wrote: > > The original discussion was about the usr merge [1], which is taking th= e > binary parts of / and putting them in /usr, then inserting symlinks in = / > to preserve backward compatibility. Yes, I'm pointing to a document on > fdo, but the systemd guys have nothing to do with the /usr merge; it > originally happened in Solaris. > > I never supported the reverse merge that has been discussed, it was jus= t > brought up I guess as an example of a Gentoo user being able to do his > own setup. Reverse merge meaning moving everything from /usr to /. > I may have contributed to the latter point, but addressing the former specifically, I, like others, have /usr mounted on an NFS server for thin clients (not in the full-true sense, but with a very minimal / currently residing on USB). What you propose moving binaries from / to /usr would render them completely unbootable without early mounting via initramfs. Granted, what I have now is rather a bodge, but it's working fine, and provided I am meticulous about any rare changes from the host build system to /, this is a small problem in the grander scheme of things, and I have one maintained 'install' on my build system. Ok, so a full thin-client would probably be a better* option, but I'm running with what I got, rather than investing a lot (of/more) time/energy in getting that solution working, which failed on (several) previous attempts (hence *). --bSIR5H9iidgI8Fo53CgnO7emJJsxvPrhj Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBCAAGBQJXCaBxAAoJEEwwM0+TwiNx7kwP/R60gYhKyINRFESWm7hcul78 QW//JGcHMqAHNDWYV0wHOxQRMFkNvCvxAQBKPI5+XjVKu/EHs1dxnlaaDLFCHKHi u53zEiRAZtT4NxkgMMt6uP5hz3OJ9c5B7JE74Sywvq84v9nJCyeTbeDe2DUi2jGI S6Kp/aq3QBjsLMpHjOkVACrrBFv4KDvenVrnduEFjsFkdQiTrXN3rqVaTuuWkjRj kd4EZdk2PLZPjHmRWkGaEmRrqYPV3kThPAgOkl01fduO5/NTz4syFKZ+A+GHFbY8 G+WTipmRXP1LiI9g8XiGU7IR2e1iZN9JtOPJYLjUMlbCEtfJRl9CqPV0Ji97oRuk Y6/5T4ntu3mzNwVVQBzyVh9tjgcVUAcfp55PvSIC8Ss7osZCxoYm2cudfFv4xhew DPQwIRzP/s2JTo76To5f5YkyJXxUOdgljks2it4T9JjpZGCLOmQ/YPlm/MndfS4r wkB2vGRyqKrh/rYc+J2F/PIIESsx/9REOIZRnH38HuGr7kV/3Do5PetpqP49h2DT IdD3OktHS8sRRphr8Kbcvpad86JrxmUW86SUkn2x58tFkEzp1Iz0xqedKq2It7lB VMzbM0X9roSDwoKtg9CACzXNFukxKEpdLYimdAMtskj3vZTGLF4SS3aivx/hEdwH fgJ3pQf3ZaWSAKoW2v8E =xdbI -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --bSIR5H9iidgI8Fo53CgnO7emJJsxvPrhj--