-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA512

On 04/24/2012 08:56 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2012 at 08:21:41PM +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote:
>> In two weeks from now, the council will meet again.  This is the
>> time to raise and prepare items that the council should put on
>> the agenda to vote on.
>> 
>> Please respond to this email with agenda items.  Please do not
>> hestitate to repeat your agenda item here with a pointer if you
>> previously suggested one (since the last meeting).
> 
> Council members,
> 
> I am very concerned about your vote last meeting with regard to
> separate /usr being supported. Whether or not it will be supported
> is not a valid question, because it will be.
> 
> There is now division in the community about your vote, so I am
> formally requesting a clarification.
> 
> I can assure the council that we are not going to try to stabilize
> newer versions of udev out of hand. We have a tracker bug open
> which will show all of the tasks we need to complete before that
> happens [1].
> 
> Once that happens, I want to start looking into the /usr merge
> (see below).
> 
> I think the more appropriate question is, do we want to continue 
> attempting to support /usr as a separate partition without an
> initramfs?
> 
> This affects much more than udev. There is another event happening
> in the linux community which is referred to as the /usr merge [2].
> I know this is happening on Fedora. I believe archlinux is looking
> into doing this, and Debian is as well.
> 
> One advantage gentoo, as a distro, would have if we do the /usr
> merge is that we can get rid of gen_usr_ldscript. This was put in
> place as a workaround [3], and we would be able to remove it.
> 
> Any distribution which does the /usr merge will not be able to
> support /usr as a separate partition without an initramfs, and I
> think it is just a matter of time until packages don't check
> /{sbin,bin,lib*} any longer.
> 
> We did have a pretty extensive discussion on the dev mailing list 
> regarding the /usr merge, and my feeling from the community was
> that we should do this [4].
> 
> In summary, I feel that if we continue supporting separate /usr
> without an initramfs, we will be harming our distro in the long
> run, so I would ask you to please carefully consider this before
> you vote.
> 
> Thanks much,
> 
> William
> 
> [1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=411627 [2]
> http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/TheCaseForTheUsrMerge
>
> 
[3] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=4411
> [4]
> http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_c3c5bdabbe058b08627ff04cee896af3.xml

I
> 
was very confused the first time this topic was brought to the
Council. I still believe this is not something we (Council) should
decide but rather the udev maintainers should decide themselves. In
any case, I am fine with bringing this issue back to Council as it
seems there is a general confusion in the Gentoo community about this.

- -- 
Regards,
Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
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=mOHn
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----