Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

2012-01-01 Thread Zac Medico
On 01/01/2012 09:39 PM, Duncan wrote: > Olivier Crête posted on Sun, 01 Jan 2012 15:17:50 -0500 as excerpted: > >> On Sun, 2012-01-01 at 12:46 -0600, William Hubbs wrote: >>> I don't think the /{bin,sbin,lib} and /usr/sbin directories should be >>> deleted. >>> >>> However, what I would like to se

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

2012-01-01 Thread Nguyen Thai Ngoc Duy
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 8:59 AM, William Hubbs wrote: > Udev, kmod (which is a replacement for module-init-tools which will be needed > by >=udev-176), systemd, and soon others, are advocating a major change > to the locations where binaries and libraries are stored on linux > systems. Could you p

[gentoo-dev] Re: rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

2012-01-01 Thread Duncan
Olivier Crête posted on Sun, 01 Jan 2012 15:17:50 -0500 as excerpted: > On Sun, 2012-01-01 at 12:46 -0600, William Hubbs wrote: >> I don't think the /{bin,sbin,lib} and /usr/sbin directories should be >> deleted. >> >> However, what I would like to see is that the package maintainers would >> be

[gentoo-dev] Automated Package Removal and Addition Tracker, for the week ending 2012-01-01 23h59 UTC

2012-01-01 Thread Robin H. Johnson
The attached list notes all of the packages that were added or removed from the tree, for the week ending 2012-01-01 23h59 UTC. Removals: sec-policy/selinux-xfce42011-12-26 13:07:19 swift Additions: dev-util/visualvm 2011-12-26 14:11:39 fordfrog mail-client/alot

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

2012-01-01 Thread Robin H. Johnson
On Sun, Jan 01, 2012 at 02:12:22AM -0500, Olivier Crête wrote: > The OpenRC/baselayout-2 fiasco, not much better than baselayout-1 and > unmaintained upstream shows that even a relatively large Why do you say that OpenRC is unmaintained upstream? OpenRC is actively maintained in Gentoo, with the la

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

2012-01-01 Thread Olivier Crête
On Sun, 2012-01-01 at 20:23 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Sun, 01 Jan 2012 15:21:24 -0500 > Olivier Crête wrote: > > Honestly, so many things just work on MacOS and just need hours of > > tweaking for us.. > > The problem with "just works" is that when it breaks, it can't be > fixed. Not bei

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

2012-01-01 Thread Olivier Crête
On Sun, 2012-01-01 at 14:51 -0600, Dale wrote: > Olivier Crête wrote: > > On Sun, 2012-01-01 at 01:33 -0600, Matthew Thode wrote: > >> On Sun, 01 Jan 2012 02:12:22 -0500 > >> Olivier Crête wrote: > >> All of my systems currently have a seperate /usr that is mounted at > >> boot. Unfortunately I d

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

2012-01-01 Thread Dale
Olivier Crête wrote: On Sun, 2012-01-01 at 01:33 -0600, Matthew Thode wrote: On Sun, 01 Jan 2012 02:12:22 -0500 Olivier Crête wrote: All of my systems currently have a seperate /usr that is mounted at boot. Unfortunately I do agree that this is not something that we can fight. This was brough

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

2012-01-01 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Sun, 01 Jan 2012 15:21:24 -0500 Olivier Crête wrote: > Honestly, so many things just work on MacOS and just need hours of > tweaking for us.. The problem with "just works" is that when it breaks, it can't be fixed. Not being able to handle /usr on its own filesystem is a perfect example of thi

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

2012-01-01 Thread Olivier Crête
On Sun, 2012-01-01 at 08:53 +, Sven Vermeulen wrote: > On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 07:59:47PM -0600, William Hubbs wrote: > > 1) Start migrating packages along with upstream and have everyone who > > has a separate /usr (including me by the way) start using an initramfs > > of some kind, either dra

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

2012-01-01 Thread Olivier Crête
On Sun, 2012-01-01 at 15:33 +0800, Patrick Lauer wrote: > On 01/01/12 15:12, Olivier Crête wrote: > > Hi, > > > > On Sat, 2011-12-31 at 19:59 -0600, William Hubbs wrote: > >> I have been working with robbat2 on solutions to the separate /usr issue > >> (That is why I have specifically cc'd him on t

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

2012-01-01 Thread Olivier Crête
Hi, On Sun, 2012-01-01 at 12:46 -0600, William Hubbs wrote: > I don't think the /{bin,sbin,lib} and /usr/sbin directories should be > deleted. > > However, what I would like to see is that the package maintainers would > be responsible for creating any compatibility symlinks their package > needs

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

2012-01-01 Thread Michał Górny
On Sun, 1 Jan 2012 01:33:05 -0600 Matthew Thode (prometheanfire) wrote: > All of my systems currently have a seperate /usr that is mounted at > boot. Unfortunately I do agree that this is not something that we can > fight. This was brought up earlier and the only thing we can do > for people li

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

2012-01-01 Thread Olivier Crête
On Sun, 2012-01-01 at 01:33 -0600, Matthew Thode wrote: > On Sun, 01 Jan 2012 02:12:22 -0500 > Olivier Crête wrote: > All of my systems currently have a seperate /usr that is mounted at > boot. Unfortunately I do agree that this is not something that we can > fight. This was brought up earlier a

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: news item for app-backup/bacula

2012-01-01 Thread Thomas Beierlein
On Sat, 31 Dec 2011 08:56:03 -0600 William Hubbs wrote: > On Fri, Dec 30, 2011 at 10:11:58AM +0100, Michał Górny wrote: > > On Fri, 30 Dec 2011 09:56:33 +0100 > > Thomas Beierlein wrote: > > > > > The 5.2.x release series of Bacula uses a new database catalog > > > format. > >

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

2012-01-01 Thread William Hubbs
Yeah I know I"m replying to my own message, but I wanted to add a thought about the symbolic links issue. I don't think the /{bin,sbin,lib} and /usr/sbin directories should be deleted. However, what I would like to see is that the package maintainers would be responsible for creating any compatib

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

2012-01-01 Thread Ciaran McCreesh
On Sun, 01 Jan 2012 02:12:22 -0500 Olivier Crête wrote: > The udev/kmod/systemd/dracut effort to standardise the base userspace > of Linux is probably scary for quite a few Gentoo-ers as it means > that the end result of an installed Gentoo system will be less > differentiated than it was before.

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

2012-01-01 Thread William Hubbs
On Sun, Jan 01, 2012 at 09:23:11AM +, Duncan wrote: > Gentoo has historically been both "light patch", with a policy of staying > close to upstream if possible, and "customizer's choice", allowing users > far more flexibility than most distros. Keeping both goals in mind, > migrating with u

[gentoo-dev] Re: rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

2012-01-01 Thread Duncan
Zac Medico posted on Sun, 01 Jan 2012 02:15:49 -0800 as excerpted: > I'm not sure if a USE flag for FEATURES setting would be necessary. If > we want to enforce a global policy, then I guess a QA warning would be > warranted. I didn't state why I suggested that, but here's the reasoning: Unless

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

2012-01-01 Thread Michał Górny
On Sat, 31 Dec 2011 19:59:47 -0600 William Hubbs wrote: > I see three options: > > 1) Start migrating packages along with upstream and have everyone who > has a separate /usr (including me by the way) start using an initramfs > of some kind, either dracut or one that we generate specifically for

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

2012-01-01 Thread William Hubbs
On Sun, Jan 01, 2012 at 02:12:22AM -0500, Olivier Crête wrote: > > 1) Start migrating packages along with upstream and have everyone who > > has a separate /usr (including me by the way) start using an initramfs > > of some kind, either dracut or one that we generate specifically for > > gentoo. Th

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

2012-01-01 Thread Dale
Rich Freeman wrote: On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 4:45 AM, Dale wrote: This is my issue as well. I tried to make a init* to deal with this and have yet to get one to work, not one single working boot up. I have tried different howtos and not one of them produced anything that works. I have not foun

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

2012-01-01 Thread Rich Freeman
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 4:45 AM, Dale wrote: > This is my issue as well.  I tried to make a init* to deal with this and > have yet to get one to work, not one single working boot up.  I have tried > different howtos and not one of them produced anything that works.  I have > not found a dracut howt

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

2012-01-01 Thread Zac Medico
On 01/01/2012 01:23 AM, Duncan wrote: > As for the switchover, I had already been thinking about it here and thus > have a couple ideas I'd very much like to see implemented in portage/PM/ > base.eclass that could definitely help, along with a USE flag. I'll call > them "migrated-rootfs" and "mig

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

2012-01-01 Thread Dale
Sven Vermeulen wrote: But if people really want to focus on initramfs, I'd appreciate some documentation help on it. Not only on how to create one, but also why it is necessary, how to manage initramfs'es, the concepts underlying, etc. Wkr, Sven Vermeulen This is my issue as well. I tried t

[gentoo-dev] Re: rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

2012-01-01 Thread Duncan
William Hubbs posted on Sat, 31 Dec 2011 19:59:47 -0600 as excerpted: > a significant change is taking place with several upstreams that will > affect us in gentoo[. Boot-critical components such as Udev, kmod, > etc], are advocating a major change to the locations where binaries > and libraries

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

2012-01-01 Thread Nirbheek Chauhan
On Sun, Jan 1, 2012 at 2:23 PM, Sven Vermeulen wrote: > On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 07:59:47PM -0600, William Hubbs wrote: >> The goal is to deprecate /bin, /lib, /sbin and /usr/sbin. My >> understanding is that they want to move software that is installed in >> /bin, /sbin and /usr/sbin to /usr/bin.

Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

2012-01-01 Thread Sven Vermeulen
On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 07:59:47PM -0600, William Hubbs wrote: > The goal is to deprecate /bin, /lib, /sbin and /usr/sbin. My > understanding is that they want to move software that is installed in > /bin, /sbin and /usr/sbin to /usr/bin. Also, they want to move > everything from /lib to /usr/lib.