| 1 |
> On Apr 8, 2016, at 8:42 PM, William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
>> On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 03:20:24PM -0700, Daniel Campbell wrote: |
| 4 |
>> Based on what I've read here in the thread, merging /bin and /sbin |
| 5 |
>> into /usr/{sbin,bin} is a matter of convenience by putting most of the |
| 6 |
>> static parts of a running system into a single path. As mentioned by |
| 7 |
>> some people, however, that's not enough to make deployment across |
| 8 |
>> multiple machines super simple. The distros that focus on that aren't |
| 9 |
>> rolling release like we are, and thus don't face the same difficulties |
| 10 |
>> that we do. In addition, Gentoo supports a broad number of choices for |
| 11 |
>> users and some are advocating for an option. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> It is true that we offer a high degree of choice to users, but one of |
| 14 |
> those choices is not which paths to install binaries and libraries |
| 15 |
> into. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Sure we do. Users can do pretty much whatever convoluted file system hierarchy layout they want prior to unpacking the stage3 -- multiple volumes, symlinks or bind-mounts to combine dirs, etc etc. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
IMO support for this usr-merge should be left to that level of system configuration, as long as portage/other PMs support installing packages in such a way that the contents of /bin and /usr/bin don't collide with each other at merge time. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
In other words, we should not drop any form of support at all for non-usr-merged systems. Which means all of that ebuild cleanup WilliamH wants to do cannot happen. Which, IMO, makes the whole thing moot. |
Archives