Hallo, * Daniel Reurich [Mon, Jan 04 2016, 12:46:46AM]: > On 04/01/16 00:25, Marco d'Itri wrote: > > On Jan 03, Eric Valette <eric.vale...@free.fr> wrote: > > > >> The debian installer should first loudly warn that having a separated / and > >> /usr may break things in the future but not forbid it. With that in place, > > This is not true: you just need to use an initramfs. > > "I have always done this in a different way" is not a valid use case, > > sorry. > > Really, just because the use case isn't one you understand doesn't mean > it should be entirely ignored. Sure there are corner cases that will
What's the use case here? Something with /usr as read-only remote-fs with a local mutable / ? Why cannot you just identify the few spots which need to be writable and do some bind-mounting on top of them? > always be fragile, but that's not the issue here. The issue at hand is > the provision of tooling that fundamentally violates the FHS by changing > the location of where binaries and libraries are located, and only > because of sloppy workmanship that has allowed packages in that will > break systems if we don't adopt these massive changes. For me, sloppy workmanship is building a special setup in a crude way while not being able to adapt it to a slightly modified base configuration, considering all tools we have nowadays. It's not like we just entered Y2K... Regards, Eduard. -- Schalten Sie auch morgen wieder irc.openprojects.net ein, wenn es heißt: boot-floppies - Freud und Leid des Debuggings. -- Karsten Merker