1 |
On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 01:49:50PM -0500, Rich Freeman wrote: |
2 |
> On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 12:03 PM, William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
> > |
4 |
> > As I and others have said on this list a thousdand times, moving |
5 |
> > everything to /usr never had anything to do with systemd and udev. This |
6 |
> > is a completely separate topic. |
7 |
> |
8 |
> Understood. However, the whole request to not have to support a |
9 |
> separate /usr without an initramfs was brought up by the udev team. |
10 |
> If udev doesn't have the need, then they should just go do what they |
11 |
> want to do and stop asking the council to step in, as there apparently |
12 |
> isn't anything for them to decide on. |
13 |
|
14 |
I wasn't actually asking the council to step in. I was just trying to |
15 |
have a discussion here. |
16 |
|
17 |
> > |
18 |
> > The arguments for moving everything into /usr seem to be pretty strong |
19 |
> > [1], and as gregkh and others have said, it would benefit us in the longrun |
20 |
> > to do it. |
21 |
> > |
22 |
> > Given that, that is not even what I'm discussing. I am just discussing |
23 |
> > moving the libraries that we manually install into /lib* back to |
24 |
> > /usr/lib* on Linux. |
25 |
> |
26 |
> I think moving everything into /usr is a good idea. However: |
27 |
> |
28 |
> 1. It isn't my decision to make. This is the role of the Council. |
29 |
|
30 |
Tell me if I am wrong here. My understanding is that this is only true |
31 |
if the community itself doesn't make the decision first. |
32 |
|
33 |
> 2. It doesn't make sense for every dev to just stick stuff wherever |
34 |
> they personally feel is best. |
35 |
> 3. Moving just a bunch of libraries to /usr and nothing else is dumb. |
36 |
> It brings none of the benefits of the /usr move, and gets rid of all |
37 |
> of the benefits of complying with FHS (like systems booting fine with |
38 |
> a separate /usr - and yes I know this is already "broken" despite the |
39 |
> fact that it works just fine for 99% of the people running in this |
40 |
> configuration). This is one of those situations where you need to |
41 |
> have a plan and do it right, or don't do it at all. |
42 |
|
43 |
Ok, I can agree with this. |
44 |
|
45 |
> If people want to argue for a /usr move by all means do so. If people |
46 |
> want to beg the Council to back this, by all means do so. If people |
47 |
> want to run for Council by all means do so. If you want to build a |
48 |
> mechanism that gives the choice to the end user based on a profile |
49 |
> setting or some other sensible mechanism, by all means do so. |
50 |
> |
51 |
> But, until the Council decides that we're really doing a coordinated |
52 |
> /usr move, then let's leave things alone. Sticking stuff in random |
53 |
> locations per the whim of individual maintainers will cause nothing |
54 |
> but trouble. |
55 |
|
56 |
There was a long thread a while back where the /usr merge was discussed |
57 |
in depth and there was no escalation to the council to make the |
58 |
decision [1]. Unless I don't remember something significant out of that |
59 |
thread, we agreed that even though some of us don't like the /usr |
60 |
merge, it is probably a good thing for us to do it in the longrun. |
61 |
|
62 |
If I were to start that thread now, I would change my introduction to |
63 |
not specifically mention udev, systemd and kmod, but my view still is |
64 |
that it will be better for us in the longrun if we do it. Maybe that is |
65 |
a topic for another thread though. |
66 |
|
67 |
William |
68 |
|
69 |
[1] |
70 |
http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_c3c5bdabbe058b08627ff04cee896af3.xml |