Archives
Archives
| From: | William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-dev@l.g.o | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-dev] Opinion against /usr merge | ||
| Date: | Tue, 17 Jul 2012 23:24:13 | ||
| Message-Id: | 20120717232302.GC17825@linux1 | ||
| In Reply to: | Re: [gentoo-dev] Opinion against /usr merge by Dale |
||
| 1 | On Tue, Jul 17, 2012 at 06:13:06PM -0500, Dale wrote: |
| 2 | > |
| 3 | > William Hubbs wrote: |
| 4 | > > |
| 5 | > > This is not quite correct. The initramfs is required because of [1]. |
| 6 | > > |
| 7 | > > |
| 8 | > > William |
| 9 | > > |
| 10 | > |
| 11 | > Where is [1]? |
| 12 | |
| 13 | [1] http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/separate-usr-is-broken |
| 14 | |
| 15 | We have a way around this in some limited circumstances with |
| 16 | busybox[sep-usr], but that definitely does not support anything fancy |
| 17 | like rade, lvm, etc. |
| 18 | |
| 19 | William |
| Subject | Author |
|---|---|
| Re: [gentoo-dev] Opinion against /usr merge | Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com> |