1 |
On Thu, Nov 8, 2012 at 5:09 PM, William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote: |
2 |
> On Thu, Nov 08, 2012 at 04:16:35PM -0500, Rich Freeman wrote: |
3 |
>> I think that the direction Gentoo wants to move in has no clear |
4 |
>> consensus. I see several options: |
5 |
>> 1. All boot-time files are in / (the old position, which we've agreed |
6 |
>> to move away from). |
7 |
>> 2. Files can be in / or /usr at maintainer discretion (align with |
8 |
>> upstream, etc). |
9 |
>> 3. All files should be in /usr - eventually /bin, /lib, and so on |
10 |
>> should be empty (where Fedora is going). |
11 |
>> |
12 |
>> Dropping support for separate /usr without one of the solutions |
13 |
>> already discussed is making the move from #1 to #2. I see modifying |
14 |
>> gen_usr_ldscript as making the step from #2 to #3. |
15 |
> |
16 |
> No, it is part of the step from #1 to #2, since gen_usr_ldscript only |
17 |
> moves shared libraries. If we turn this off, we end up leaving shared |
18 |
> libraries where upstream intended them to be instead of putting them in |
19 |
> / and separating them from the static libraries. |
20 |
> |
21 |
|
22 |
I think this is a matter of one saying tomato, and another saying tomato. :) |
23 |
|
24 |
However, the end result is that after making the proposed change lots |
25 |
of stuff that is currently being installed in / will end up installed |
26 |
in /usr. Sure, that might be how upstream intended it, but it is a |
27 |
change all the same. If maintainers are comfortable with it no harm |
28 |
in doing it with testing. |
29 |
|
30 |
I haven't really seen any complaints per-se. I'd love to hear from |
31 |
package maintainers that use gen_usr_ldscript either way. I wouldn't |
32 |
be one to oppose the change, but I just wanted to make sure that |
33 |
everybody was aware of the consequences. |
34 |
|
35 |
Rich |