| 1 |
On 03/31/2012 04:49 AM, Duncan wrote: |
| 2 |
> Ciaran McCreesh posted on Sat, 31 Mar 2012 10:52:53 +0100 as excerpted: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
>> On Sat, 31 Mar 2012 12:44:03 +0300 Alex Alexander |
| 5 |
>> <alex.alexander@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 6 |
>>> @preserved-libs works very well and is awesome. hack or not. IMO it |
| 7 |
>>> should be in stable already. I've been using it on stable production |
| 8 |
>>> boxes for years without any issues :) |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> ...and here we see the problem. You think that "I haven't noticed it |
| 11 |
>> break" means "it works". |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Funny how familiar that argument looks... aka... |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> A separate /usr is already broken, you just don't know it yet. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
For separate /usr, there's a relatively simple solution, which is to |
| 18 |
mount /usr with an initramfs. For preserve-libs, there is no such a |
| 19 |
simple solution. Much like separate-/usr-without-initramfs, |
| 20 |
preserve-libs does not work correctly unless lots of different pieces of |
| 21 |
software behave cooperatively. |
| 22 |
-- |
| 23 |
Thanks, |
| 24 |
Zac |
Archives