1 |
On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 12:02 PM Mike Gilbert <floppym@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> |
3 |
> On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 8:00 AM David Seifert <soap@g.o> wrote: |
4 |
> > |
5 |
> > On Sun, 2019-10-13 at 12:33 -0400, Mike Gilbert wrote: |
6 |
> > > On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 1:52 PM David Seifert <soap@g.o> |
7 |
> > > wrote: |
8 |
> > > > On Sat, 2019-10-12 at 19:01 +0200, Dennis Schridde wrote: |
9 |
> > > > > On Samstag, 12. Oktober 2019 18:02:28 CEST William Hubbs wrote: |
10 |
> > > > > > On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 01:11:49PM +0200, Michał Górny wrote: |
11 |
> > > > > > > On Sat, 2019-10-12 at 13:00 +0200, David Seifert wrote: |
12 |
> > > > > > > > * Some distros have not just merged / and /usr, they |
13 |
> > > > > > > > |
14 |
> > > > > > > > have also merged /usr/bin and /usr/sbin. By giving |
15 |
> > > > > > > > users the choice of merging */bin and */sbin, |
16 |
> > > > > > > > Gentoo follows suit. |
17 |
> > > > > > > |
18 |
> > > > > > > What about the scenario when /bin has been merged with |
19 |
> > > > > > > /usr/sbin |
20 |
> > > > > > > and /sbin with /usr/bin? ;-P |
21 |
> > > > > > |
22 |
> > > > > > I also don't see the need for something like this. The idea of |
23 |
> > > > > > the |
24 |
> > > > > > /usr |
25 |
> > > > > > merge is to have all binaries available in one place, and there |
26 |
> > > > > > really |
27 |
> > > > > > is not a good justification for separating bin from sbin. |
28 |
> > > > > |
29 |
> > > > > Do I read this correctly? USE=-split-usr currently means that |
30 |
> > > > > /bin, |
31 |
> > > > > /sbin, / |
32 |
> > > > > usr/bin and /usr/sbin point to the same directory? |
33 |
> > > > > |
34 |
> > > > > If that is not the case, then I agree that users should have the |
35 |
> > > > > possibility |
36 |
> > > > > to set it up like this and USE=-split-sbin should be supported. |
37 |
> > > > > |
38 |
> > > > > --Dennis |
39 |
> > > > |
40 |
> > > > I agree, I wasn't aware that USE=-split-usr implies the complete 2- |
41 |
> > > > level (/usr and *sbin) merge. In that case, all of this is |
42 |
> > > > obsolete. |
43 |
> > > |
44 |
> > > That was NOT my intention when I introduced the split-usr USE flag. |
45 |
> > > |
46 |
> > > For bin/sbin, I would prefer to drop any conflicting links |
47 |
> > > unconditionally. Do you have examples of scenarios where this is not |
48 |
> > > possible? |
49 |
> > > |
50 |
> > |
51 |
> > William has confirmed on IRC that USE=-split-usr performs the complete |
52 |
> > Fedora-esque /usr merge (which makes sense IMO). |
53 |
> |
54 |
> William's opinion is not the only one that matters. |
55 |
|
56 |
Sorry, I guess you are referring to the behavior baselayout? That |
57 |
doesn't necessarily align with the global usage. |