On Thu, 22 Dec 2011 09:17:05 +0100, Enrico Weigelt <weig...@metux.de> wrote: > * Russell Coker <russ...@coker.com.au> schrieb: > > On Wed, 21 Dec 2011, Tanguy Ortolo <tanguy+deb...@ortolo.eu> wrote: > > > I tend to agree. At least, this is how I interpret the FHS, and it seems > > > appropriate to me. Although it may not be useful in most cases, I do not > > > see it as harmful. > > > > The harm is if it takes us extra development time because other > > distributions > > don't support it, provide configuration options for it, or test it. > > Hmm, AFAIK Gentoo still is FHS compliant in this regard. Ubuntu too. > No idea what SuSE does, but who really cares what these windows imitator > jerks do ? ;-o > > > Things have changed a lot since the FSSTD first came out. > > True. But the need for quick and easy system maintenance remains.
It seems to me that the above exchange sums up the main thrusts of this thread. On one side we have people that wish to drop a requirement to have an independently bootable root partition because that will save them effort, and on the other side we have people that see that we're losing a significant asset if we do that. In reality, the folks on the status quo side probably only care about their servers, and are quite happy to have their laptops slightly restricted in the combinations that are possible, while the people arguing for change just want some way to not be forced to do the extra work when it seems mostly pointless. Could we not have a package that checks if a system is going to be unbootable under the circumstances in question (i.e. it has /usr on nfs4, or whatever) and refuse to install on such a system, lets call that package 'early-boot-usr'. Then for the people that are having to put in extra effort into packaging things that want to assume that /usr is there from early boot, they just need to depend on early-boot-usr. I have a feeling that most of the people that care about the separation of / and /usr only really care on systems that don't need the packages that are going to have that dependency, and for the few overlaps that there are, the effort would then be focused where it's needed. Cheers, Phil. -- |)| Philip Hands [+44 (0)20 8530 9560] http://www.hands.com/ |-| HANDS.COM Ltd. http://www.uk.debian.org/ |(| 10 Onslow Gardens, South Woodford, London E18 1NE ENGLAND
pgpthRrunCt2h.pgp
Description: PGP signature
