Re: [gentoo-project] Support for Seperate /usr

[Michał Górny]

Dnia 2013-08-01, o godz. 22:04:36
Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com> napisał(a):

> Rich Freeman wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 6:49 PM, William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote:
> >> The whole reason I brought this up is, according to some, the council
> >> did step in in April of 2012 and mandate that we must support separate
> >> /usr without an early boot workaround. If you read the meeting log from
> >> that meeting, it seems pretty clear that was chainsaw's intent.
> >>
> >> Because of that perception, if base-system decides to do something
> >> differently, there would definitely be flack over it.
> > I understand that completely.  However, I'd only like to step in if
> > base-system actually plans to do something and is concerned about
> > there being flack over it.  If they don't care to change anything then
> > no action is needed.  If they plan to change things but don't care
> > about hearing people complain, then no action is needed.  If I took
> > action it would only be to tell them they can do whatever they want to
> > as long as an initramfs still works (or whatever other workarounds
> > people come up with) - I'd just prefer to only step in if somebody
> > feels there is a need.
> >
> > Right now the only argument I'm hearing is that we need to clarify
> > what the policy is because the policy is unclear and lack of clear
> > policy bothers some people.  I'm not hearing why we care about there
> > being a policy in the first place.  If somebody just states "I'm doing
> > a lot of extra work because I feel like I have to, so please tell me
> > that I don't have to" then I'm fine with stepping in.
> >
> > Rich
> >
> >
>
> As a user, I to would like this clarified.  I would like a clear
> statement as to whether a separate /usr without init* is supported or
> not.  No tap dancing around the issue, just a clear decision or a
> statement as to what the prior decision was.

I agree here. Without a clear decision we can't properly tell users
what to do. If it's going to be not supported, we shall encourage them
(via a news item, likely) really much to update their computers.

This is some serious work that needs time to be done and user would
prefer knowing early and not whenever one of the devs decides not to
support it anymore. Non-booting system is not a good news, and unclear
policy shouldn't be an excuse for this.

-- 
Best regards,
Michał Górny