On 2013-10-01 08:16, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> There are many examples in /usr you could have used to illustrate your
> point, such as many fuse modules. And yet you chose an imaginary space
> invader game.
>
> Let's rather stick within the bounds of what is feasible, OK?
What can I say, I like to
On 01/10/2013 00:14, pk wrote:
> On 2013-09-30 08:45, Alan McKinnon wrote:
>
>> That is over-simplifying the problem and trivializing it. No-one ever
>> said the *everythign* in /usr is criticial for boot.
>
> Is it really over-simplyfying it? How am I supposed to know whatever
> comes next? Some
On Tue, 01 Oct 2013 00:14:55 +0200, pk wrote:
> > Your second paragraph reveals that you beleive you already know
> > everything you need to have to boot your system. Now do the same for
> > every possible Gentoo user out there and have it work 100% of the time
> > in ALL valid cases.
>
> I *do
On 2013-09-30 08:45, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> That is over-simplifying the problem and trivializing it. No-one ever
> said the *everythign* in /usr is criticial for boot.
Is it really over-simplyfying it? How am I supposed to know whatever
comes next? Someone ("upstream") *may* find it boot-critica
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 2:24 PM, pk wrote:
> On 2013-09-30 04:05, Mark David Dumlao wrote:
>> 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.
>
>
On Mon, 30 Sep 2013 10:42:37 +0800, Mark David Dumlao wrote:
> > What was /usr's original purpose?
> /usr was originally the home directory. Programs were moved there
> because Unix didn't fit into a single disk.
>
> http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/2010-December/074114.html
Thanks f
On 30/09/2013 08:24, pk wrote:
> 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-cri
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
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 12:13 PM, Pandu Poluan wrote:
>
> On Sep 30, 2013 9:31 AM, "Daniel Campbell" wrote:
>>
>
> --- le snip ---
>
>> If the proposed solution is all binaries and libraries in the same
>> root/prefix directory, then why call it /usr?
>
> My question exactly.
>
> Why install to /
On Sep 30, 2013 9:31 AM, "Daniel Campbell" wrote:
>
--- le snip ---
> If the proposed solution is all binaries and libraries in the same
> root/prefix directory, then why call it /usr?
My question exactly.
Why install to /usr at all, leaving /bin and /sbin a practically empty
directory contain
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 10:15 AM, Daniel Campbell wrote:
> On 09/29/2013 09:05 PM, Mark David Dumlao wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 9:50 AM, Daniel Campbell wrote:
>>> Anyway, I'm not in favor of FHS _per se_, but it sounds pretty
>>> reasonable to have some semblance of order among where diff
On 09/29/2013 09:25 PM, Mark David Dumlao wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Daniel Campbell wrote:
>> On 09/29/2013 08:51 PM, Mark David Dumlao wrote:
>>> On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Daniel Campbell wrote:
It's fairly obvious (to me, anyway) that anything mounting a filesystem
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Daniel Campbell wrote:
> On 09/29/2013 08:51 PM, Mark David Dumlao wrote:
>> On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Daniel Campbell wrote:
>>> It's fairly obvious (to me, anyway) that anything mounting a filesystem
>>> and making it available is system-critical. I run
On 09/29/2013 09:05 PM, Mark David Dumlao wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 9:50 AM, Daniel Campbell wrote:
>> Anyway, I'm not in favor of FHS _per se_, but it sounds pretty
>> reasonable to have some semblance of order among where different parts
>> of a system go. Shoving everything into /usr and
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 9:50 AM, Daniel Campbell wrote:
> Anyway, I'm not in favor of FHS _per se_, but it sounds pretty
> reasonable to have some semblance of order among where different parts
> of a system go. Shoving everything into /usr and symlinking everything
> else seems like a stop-gap or
On 09/29/2013 08:51 PM, Mark David Dumlao wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Daniel Campbell wrote:
>> It's fairly obvious (to me, anyway) that anything mounting a filesystem
>> and making it available is system-critical. I run samba and don't need
>> it for boot, but like you said, someone
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 9:22 AM, Daniel Campbell wrote:
> It's fairly obvious (to me, anyway) that anything mounting a filesystem
> and making it available is system-critical. I run samba and don't need
> it for boot, but like you said, someone may need that. I wouldn't see a
> problem with smbmou
On 09/29/2013 08:40 PM, Mark David Dumlao wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 8:54 AM, Daniel Campbell wrote:
>> I'm not affected by anything regarding the /usr switch, but I'd like
>> to have a good talk with the first person who decided a
>> system-critical binary belonged in /usr instead of /bin o
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 8:54 AM, Daniel Campbell wrote:
> I'm not affected by anything regarding the /usr switch, but I'd like
> to have a good talk with the first person who decided a
> system-critical binary belonged in /usr instead of /bin or /sbin.
> They've created a mess for every distro and
On 09/29/2013 08:17 PM, Mark David Dumlao wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 8:54 AM, Daniel Campbell wrote:
>> I'm not affected by anything regarding the /usr switch, but I'd like
>> to have a good talk with the first person who decided a
>> system-critical binary belonged in /usr instead of /bin o
On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 8:54 AM, Daniel Campbell wrote:
> I'm not affected by anything regarding the /usr switch, but I'd like
> to have a good talk with the first person who decided a
> system-critical binary belonged in /usr instead of /bin or /sbin.
> They've created a mess for every distro and
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 09/29/2013 02:52 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> All,
>
> I can clarify one part of the systemd issue, because I have been
> involved in this part of the issue for months. Again, I am not
> trying to start a dispute here, just providing a clarificatio
All,
I can clarify one part of the systemd issue, because I have been
involved in this part of the issue for months. Again, I am not trying
to start a dispute here, just providing a clarification.
The choice to install all of the systemd binaries in /usr is not an
upstream choice. It was a choic
23 matches
Mail list logo
