| 1 |
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 10:28 PM, Steven J Long |
| 2 |
<slong@××××××××××××××××××.uk> wrote: |
| 3 |
> As for the burden of ensuring that binaries installed to /{s,}bin don't link |
| 4 |
> to libs in /usr, why not just automate a QA check for that, and let |
| 5 |
> developers decide whether a fix is necessary? After all, core packages that |
| 6 |
> do that even when configured with prefix and execprefix = /, aren't so |
| 7 |
> portable, and Gentoo has always championed "doing the right thing" wrt |
| 8 |
> helping upstream fix portability issues. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
The only issue with that logic is that upstream is perfectly aware of |
| 11 |
what they're doing already, and bugs are likely to be closed as |
| 12 |
WONTFIX. So, all the QA checks would do is ensure that we slowly |
| 13 |
start maintaining forks of more and more packages. Right now the |
| 14 |
problem is probably manageable, but I'm not convinced it will stay |
| 15 |
that way. Once upstream developers consider all constraints to be |
| 16 |
removed on their dependencies you could see a lot of stuff getting |
| 17 |
pulled into root if you tried to enforce this rule. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
In any case, it sounds like the directive is to keep limping along for |
| 20 |
a while longer, and that makes sense anyway until docs/etc are |
| 21 |
improved. I agree with Ralph's suggestion that the newer initramfs |
| 22 |
tools should be stabilized as well. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Rich |
Archives