| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On 08/18/2013 11:10 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 5 |
> On Sun, Aug 18, 2013 at 10:48 PM, William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote: |
| 6 |
>> Basically the status quo includes specific changes that were made in |
| 7 |
>> our packaging to allow this sort of working separate /usr without |
| 8 |
>> initramfs configuration to continue limping along, but we need to undo |
| 9 |
>> them. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> Why do we have to undo them? |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> I can understand that implementing them was a waste of time, but that |
| 14 |
> time is already wasted. Does it take much effort to maintain the |
| 15 |
> fixes? For all I know they do - but could you articulate this? |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> I fully support that we should stop doing any more work to keep a |
| 18 |
> separate /usr working without an initramfs. My question is why do we |
| 19 |
> need to start undoing the work that has already been done? |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Because, the work that has already been done makes no bloody sense. |
| 22 |
bzip2 is in / but not xz or lbzip2. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
The cruelest prank of all of this bullspit, systemd is installed in / |
| 25 |
despite many upstreams hardcoding THE CORRECT LOCATION of /usr. Yeah, |
| 26 |
that's right, we are moving things to / and breaking systems and then |
| 27 |
upstream just laughs at us when we report bugs. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
It is not possible to keep systems running like this, and it is HARMING |
| 30 |
us to even try. Please, stop moving things from /usr to /, and please |
| 31 |
move things back where upstream expects them. Honestly I'm considering |
| 32 |
a /usr merge on my system just to stop all this stupidity from breaking |
| 33 |
my system. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
v/r |
| 36 |
Zero |
| 37 |
> |
| 38 |
> If you can point to some package where everytime upstream does a bump |
| 39 |
> you have to redo 47 patches to keep it working in / but it would just |
| 40 |
> work effortlessly if it were in /usr, that would be a great argument |
| 41 |
> to move it back to /usr on the next bump. Maybe there is something |
| 42 |
> else which is causing you to waste time. |
| 43 |
> |
| 44 |
> I'd just like to hear a driver for reverting the work that was already |
| 45 |
> done. I fully get the argument that the work shouldn't have been |
| 46 |
> required in the first place. What I don't get is now that the effort |
| 47 |
> is sunk why it needs to be ditched. I think many would like to |
| 48 |
> understand the drivers here. |
| 49 |
> |
| 50 |
> Otherwise it seems to me like the best path forward is to stop making |
| 51 |
> new fixes, but just hang onto the ones we have until they no longer |
| 52 |
> work. At some point upstream will make a change that forces our hand, |
| 53 |
> but why not wait until then? What does it cost us to wait? |
| 54 |
> |
| 55 |
> Rich |
| 56 |
> |
| 57 |
> |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 60 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) |
| 61 |
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ |
| 62 |
|
| 63 |
iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJSEZWCAAoJEKXdFCfdEflKc9sP/Armqjz2WhZ6hl69dHoY1+Fg |
| 64 |
ccsXjGYPr6JzR/ILmxq+WXOTJWOO+n/99c6Hmsg0nWxSrMyRLptMF3R3BxPeU6Me |
| 65 |
2NsbqVmaer1P45hVbYpGga2M3sCzLaSEtNfMpH40dzPsoeheIBq9T/lajNqsTvIK |
| 66 |
0gp+o7A4Hf7JGS9QRI6Je6VWTZ0TDhmlhenDPgFVcgujP3QJIHUFQOMdomXh05Wh |
| 67 |
NZ0ib+7+NeNoi1RUWx9TgizmFeWXx3uTMz3RMfI9C3Ca5/9F0Vwdpz2dI4PetlgX |
| 68 |
iwAhRYGi67QseIy+2Uod4Cfzhs0NfsIHEWvgigweO+cx0NFCKHNqShgAYjs6D6t5 |
| 69 |
0e3+jTlgT408N3gSOGFDs2mUFDzDkhY5KQa8wDqzPWPQrxQOjXWFCXo8EzTDOsKt |
| 70 |
mIrbduZLp5PWj9E+5aiL6YTB8ZeDDeCfZLRmqqUNTq8GCnPFWTe7uGo1l23iq8OS |
| 71 |
YLlHeYR3o6X8KnssxqdXKI613O/PWybhFIdJgyRG+HNj0MwRToGMYmCV5s5QGMSH |
| 72 |
J4YaueOldKNsEbQg4HEHezNUy14wH28YAb9MQF4oEwc2UvGvINbNUl90Y+xEMUO4 |
| 73 |
ArFLZZLneAw1h7v7BWm135OjQwMxlgTRhZf/mhwYijxtCiy/CqyOzpBcId9RMGGo |
| 74 |
ea4cy1EbQPI9MlLqafzs |
| 75 |
=mOuO |
| 76 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives