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 274951381F3 for ; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 03:04:41 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A59FAE09F7; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 03:04:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-yh0-f51.google.com (mail-yh0-f51.google.com [209.85.213.51]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E89BCE09EF for ; Fri, 2 Aug 2013 03:04:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-yh0-f51.google.com with SMTP id 29so93733yhl.24 for ; Thu, 01 Aug 2013 20:04:39 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:x-enigmail-version:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=NpWqmuHGgYi4Sj4eMf795UL24RYgxTPbdkgl3s2JKz4=; b=Ar6ywtifGctNbFs69Q8i8DtlMrF90E96CJDepgSQeAdTqjSwj+8FvhdDRsYFLS+dVV OTRrOnsgR0BqBtB+7fVPwMF2PUkh5DHyKQ+3wX7BuNvbvAixmgASmKedkNtWc7daOD/t 1BVKtIIXkzV76oO42hIbP3nGGl76cvTwC4AsUr+A6fm+lqMurZBcnAGCMqhGXteNW0Ut eLxKYKUtWqvj3HKea1J2eGVH0i/QX9UYOg/WJ76Cf3BglVbK95HJLrXHxnCrozPVZg0j 1whGrZqLFTuzOryGjW6uT7vtfLRSEvjggrRrxIIzpmbzDYiQIHN9mX8vHsPFifJFau+m 5wRA== X-Received: by 10.236.151.129 with SMTP id b1mr2789916yhk.253.1375412679131; Thu, 01 Aug 2013 20:04:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.2.5] (adsl-65-0-122-60.jan.bellsouth.net. [65.0.122.60]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id b50sm6685131yhl.1.2013.08.01.20.04.37 for (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 01 Aug 2013 20:04:38 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <51FB21C4.7040009@gmail.com> Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2013 22:04:36 -0500 From: Dale User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:22.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/22.0 SeaMonkey/2.19 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Reply-To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Support for Seperate /usr References: <20130801224933.GA32734@linux1> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 5387473a-cfb8-4946-8944-3f18e874503b X-Archives-Hash: 05784788f8cfc8bf070e89d07e1b3872 Rich Freeman wrote: > On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 6:49 PM, William Hubbs 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!