public inbox for gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Support for Seperate /usr
Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2013 22:04:36 -0500	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <51FB21C4.7040009@gmail.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <CAGfcS_m9ACMiyUcdM6vRXjagusC23Rc60eDGtcOUs2wcUvwVmQ@mail.gmail.com>

Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 6:49 PM, William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> The whole reason I brought this up is, according to some, the council
>> did step in in April of 2012 and mandate that we must support separate
>> /usr without an early boot workaround. If you read the meeting log from
>> that meeting, it seems pretty clear that was chainsaw's intent.
>>
>> Because of that perception, if base-system decides to do something
>> differently, there would definitely be flack over it.
> I understand that completely.  However, I'd only like to step in if
> base-system actually plans to do something and is concerned about
> there being flack over it.  If they don't care to change anything then
> no action is needed.  If they plan to change things but don't care
> about hearing people complain, then no action is needed.  If I took
> action it would only be to tell them they can do whatever they want to
> as long as an initramfs still works (or whatever other workarounds
> people come up with) - I'd just prefer to only step in if somebody
> feels there is a need.
>
> Right now the only argument I'm hearing is that we need to clarify
> what the policy is because the policy is unclear and lack of clear
> policy bothers some people.  I'm not hearing why we care about there
> being a policy in the first place.  If somebody just states "I'm doing
> a lot of extra work because I feel like I have to, so please tell me
> that I don't have to" then I'm fine with stepping in.
>
> Rich
>
>

As a user, I to would like this clarified.  I would like a clear
statement as to whether a separate /usr without init* is supported or
not.  No tap dancing around the issue, just a clear decision or a
statement as to what the prior decision was.

Dale

:-)  :-) 

-- 
I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words!



  reply	other threads:[~2013-08-02  3:04 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2013-08-01 21:16 [gentoo-project] Support for Seperate /usr Rich Freeman
2013-08-01 21:42 ` Andreas K. Huettel
2013-08-01 23:26   ` Rich Freeman
2013-08-01 22:49 ` William Hubbs
2013-08-01 22:57   ` Samuli Suominen
2013-08-01 23:15   ` Rich Freeman
2013-08-02  3:04     ` Dale [this message]
2013-08-02  8:15       ` Michał Górny
2013-08-06  0:32 ` Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina
2013-08-11 14:59 ` [gentoo-project] Support for separate /usr Ulrich Mueller

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=51FB21C4.7040009@gmail.com \
    --to=rdalek1967@gmail.com \
    --cc=gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox