| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On 08/01/2013 05:16 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 5 |
> Splitting thread so that the agenda thread isn't lost in discussion: |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> On Thu, Aug 1, 2013 at 4:04 PM, Alexis Ballier <aballier@g.o> wrote: |
| 8 |
>> I have no opinion whether separate usr should be supported or not: I |
| 9 |
>> have not been using this layout since years. However, I strongly prefer |
| 10 |
>> some kind of consistency: The traditional layout with a minimal / to |
| 11 |
>> boot or the usr move both have their advantages; if we go for something |
| 12 |
>> in between we get none of them. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> I tend to loosely agree here. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> My inclination right now is to support this proposal if either of the |
| 17 |
> following is true: |
| 18 |
> 1. Somebody explains that right now the absence of a decision is |
| 19 |
> causing them actual problems (extra work, limitations, whatever). |
| 20 |
dozens of things have randomly been moved from /usr to / as a result |
| 21 |
strictly of user complaints. For instance bzip2 was moved to / but |
| 22 |
lbzip2 is in /usr which means I can't safely do something like "eselect |
| 23 |
bzip2" and use a properly threaded bzip2 implementation. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
- -ZC |
| 26 |
> 2. This becomes necessary to enable some larger long-term goal, which |
| 27 |
> has received council approval. |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> #2 was basically covered by Alexis already. |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> Regarding #1, I informally emailed the base-system maintainers a week |
| 32 |
> ago about whether there was any need to revisit last year's decision. |
| 33 |
> I didn't really get a sense that anybody really needed the council to |
| 34 |
> step in now. I recognize that William is also a base-system |
| 35 |
> maintainer so if he wants to state that he is subject to some kind of |
| 36 |
> extra work or such supporting separate /usr without an early boot |
| 37 |
> workaround I'll certainly be sympathetic. |
| 38 |
> |
| 39 |
> I do favor the dropping of support for separate /usr without an early |
| 40 |
> boot workaround. I just don't think the council should actually step |
| 41 |
> in until somebody needs us to, or as part of some larger plan. If the |
| 42 |
> base-system maintainers have things under control, better to let them |
| 43 |
> handle it. |
| 44 |
> |
| 45 |
> Rich |
| 46 |
> |
| 47 |
> |
| 48 |
|
| 49 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 50 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) |
| 51 |
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJSAEQuAAoJEKXdFCfdEflKP5gP/jxr4FopH8XD6KPUctt7BH3/ |
| 54 |
y99DzXOFNmCFUC5AnYpkUW8XUchQv2e0Ti+OLAaTLHtvL8h2dfbQn58mDToqQGq0 |
| 55 |
Z/ifB3Pk4R31G8OzA1JL7NsQjJR3fgVALzlmD1nv7W43Jr4mMrvQtAkMbcYcDKzc |
| 56 |
14RDkCMiewm+AAqQ6DWSuD+GM07lXw5y3aDp0vfGzgKQ2GVOXHsY77WIRFLveMrD |
| 57 |
rWRKu8xt7WZ+t4DBl3uQm7mz0khvJnY4B1cY7SSlog8QnrXxM9ofU63RJ740MeUb |
| 58 |
K72eWvjM/ZKbkpkjiMDKILNnuEwgCWsRXviO8DSNv1NqkQM3GkX84rMYJvtxIFSD |
| 59 |
aYZQ9wTK7kN6gwjcH4/0zBi1xYG1krwd+sakRUsmxeMNuLgZixTa16WuB5Shfzrs |
| 60 |
KhzfANPQAWKGchEMQlP4AJT4GyMLFhP8xe5Q6MdYesduK8GP/DQhC3xsJBzRXC7C |
| 61 |
qUCN+5Y9Ub7Z+BWAPObW9e1fMzyiwwKLfunepkVIOYwYZsUyxfQYAMfM7VFLqtDU |
| 62 |
x1YG9cZArPRcZJdn8LFe82o9DCyUUpaXviEePY6y+aZ+gPNWXEoBuyiiznMsXj17 |
| 63 |
T89JjJb4R74CDUniGGqKAqKqCaivm6FmUH7B11fEPe/1oEbcRUEoKDHIVxn362oy |
| 64 |
CP8r+XZhTp5dxYplwMqh |
| 65 |
=BGXp |
| 66 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives