On 2013-09-30 04:05, Mark David Dumlao wrote: > It's true that it's nice to have a semblance of order where different parts > go. > But "all libraries and binaries in /usr" is also a semblance of order. You > don't > separate stuff for the sake of separating stuff. You separate them because you > have a good reason to separate them. It turns out that there isn't a good > reason > to separate them, and that there's no way to predictably separate them. > > Mushing them together isn't just a stop-gap or good-enough solution. The > idea of keeping system-critical separate from non-critical was not > maintainable > in the long run to begin with.
So what you're saying is that everything in /usr is system-critical? I have gimp installed in /usr... I don't see a need to start gimp at boot time. Maybe we should classify frozen-bubble as system-critical as well (it's also in /usr)? Seriously, boot-critical would be something that the system cannot *boot without*, which belongs in /. Everything else should be in /usr, i.e. non-boot-critical. How hard is it to start *non-boot* (system) critical *after* boot (things like sshd)? I do that today... > are the same. Distro packagers, however, have to decide for 100% of the cases. > So they're going to end up making weird decisions that are easy for you to > second-guess but are actually tough. That's only true for binary distros. > If you want to solve the "hard problem", you want to create a tool that > will automate / and /usr migrations. Portage has to be aware of the tool What's wrong with using autotools? I really don't see why you need it to be dynamic. In Gentoo you install stuff once for every version (or if you change use flag). Why invent stuff/complicate matters when you don't need to? Best regards Peter K
