1 |
On Tue, Nov 13, 2012 at 1:40 PM, Ian Stakenvicius <axs@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> ... Except that is specifically what WilliamH is requesting -- |
3 |
> policy, that any user planning to use a separate /usr on gentoo for |
4 |
> linux be required to either use an initramfs or busybox[sep-usr]; ie, |
5 |
> the two methods that allow /usr to be mounted early enough to blur any |
6 |
> technical limitations between separating / and /usr (on linux) |
7 |
> |
8 |
> Right? |
9 |
|
10 |
Yup, though whether you call it a policy or guidance or whatever, the |
11 |
bottom line is the same. |
12 |
|
13 |
I think what this boils down to is that there are masked versions of |
14 |
packages out there which will break systems that have a separate /usr |
15 |
that don't get it mounted early in boot. Those who maintain them want |
16 |
to get them out into testing, and eventually make them stable. |
17 |
They're holding off to allow everybody to migrate. |
18 |
|
19 |
It sounds like we might or might not have another migration option, |
20 |
which is great. However, considering a pre-req is going to be having |
21 |
things like the relevant genkernel stable first I think it makes sense |
22 |
to at least get the ball rolling. |
23 |
|
24 |
I think we need some kind of timeline for moving this along - most of |
25 |
the pieces are in place now, and we just need to coordinate moving |
26 |
them into stable and sending out communications and having a timeline |
27 |
for users to make their changes, whether that is an initramfs, or a |
28 |
udev alternative, or early boot scripts, or whatever. |
29 |
|
30 |
Rich |