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 1EF261381F3 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 2013 00:32:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 07D2BE0B42; Tue, 6 Aug 2013 00:32:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 659D0E0B33 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 2013 00:32:26 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.107.2] (109.sub-75-211-192.myvzw.com [75.211.192.109]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: zerochaos) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2604F33ECE3 for ; Tue, 6 Aug 2013 00:32:25 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <5200442E.7010105@gentoo.org> Date: Mon, 05 Aug 2013 20:32:46 -0400 From: "Rick \"Zero_Chaos\" Farina" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130524 Thunderbird/17.0.6 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: In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6a1pre Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 849747f0-3248-451c-99a4-0bd109f454d4 X-Archives-Hash: 469845c3b912c5b4e6640cca2c28a989 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 08/01/2013 05:16 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > Splitting thread so that the agenda thread isn't lost in discussion: > > On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Alexis Ballier wrote: >> I have no opinion whether separate usr should be supported or not: I >> have not been using this layout since years. However, I strongly prefer >> some kind of consistency: The traditional layout with a minimal / to >> boot or the usr move both have their advantages; if we go for something >> in between we get none of them. > > I tend to loosely agree here. > > My inclination right now is to support this proposal if either of the > following is true: > 1. Somebody explains that right now the absence of a decision is > causing them actual problems (extra work, limitations, whatever). dozens of things have randomly been moved from /usr to / as a result strictly of user complaints. For instance bzip2 was moved to / but lbzip2 is in /usr which means I can't safely do something like "eselect bzip2" and use a properly threaded bzip2 implementation. - -ZC > 2. This becomes necessary to enable some larger long-term goal, which > has received council approval. > > #2 was basically covered by Alexis already. > > Regarding #1, I informally emailed the base-system maintainers a week > ago about whether there was any need to revisit last year's decision. > I didn't really get a sense that anybody really needed the council to > step in now. I recognize that William is also a base-system > maintainer so if he wants to state that he is subject to some kind of > extra work or such supporting separate /usr without an early boot > workaround I'll certainly be sympathetic. > > I do favor the dropping of support for separate /usr without an early > boot workaround. I just don't think the council should actually step > in until somebody needs us to, or as part of some larger plan. If the > base-system maintainers have things under control, better to let them > handle it. > > Rich > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJSAEQuAAoJEKXdFCfdEflKP5gP/jxr4FopH8XD6KPUctt7BH3/ y99DzXOFNmCFUC5AnYpkUW8XUchQv2e0Ti+OLAaTLHtvL8h2dfbQn58mDToqQGq0 Z/ifB3Pk4R31G8OzA1JL7NsQjJR3fgVALzlmD1nv7W43Jr4mMrvQtAkMbcYcDKzc 14RDkCMiewm+AAqQ6DWSuD+GM07lXw5y3aDp0vfGzgKQ2GVOXHsY77WIRFLveMrD rWRKu8xt7WZ+t4DBl3uQm7mz0khvJnY4B1cY7SSlog8QnrXxM9ofU63RJ740MeUb K72eWvjM/ZKbkpkjiMDKILNnuEwgCWsRXviO8DSNv1NqkQM3GkX84rMYJvtxIFSD aYZQ9wTK7kN6gwjcH4/0zBi1xYG1krwd+sakRUsmxeMNuLgZixTa16WuB5Shfzrs KhzfANPQAWKGchEMQlP4AJT4GyMLFhP8xe5Q6MdYesduK8GP/DQhC3xsJBzRXC7C qUCN+5Y9Ub7Z+BWAPObW9e1fMzyiwwKLfunepkVIOYwYZsUyxfQYAMfM7VFLqtDU x1YG9cZArPRcZJdn8LFe82o9DCyUUpaXviEePY6y+aZ+gPNWXEoBuyiiznMsXj17 T89JjJb4R74CDUniGGqKAqKqCaivm6FmUH7B11fEPe/1oEbcRUEoKDHIVxn362oy CP8r+XZhTp5dxYplwMqh =BGXp -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----