> > Council decided years ago that we don't support separate /usr without > > an initramfs, but we haven't completed that transition yet. > > Which doesn't imply that we deliberately break things.
That's right. Though we should at some point start thinking about an end of support for separate usr without initramfs. Why? Because the number of required hacks and complexity will only increase, as will the number of uncooperative upstreams. It's called a strategic retreat. :D My suggestion would be that the next profile version (21? 22?) declares separate /usr a broken configuration, and explicitly encourages devs to introduce all ebuild simplifications that are made possible by this. (Like this symlink - no more conditional code.) No more discussions about "not breaking things" at that point. (Or to put it another way, I think we should stop wasting time and effort here just to be able to live in the past.) -- Andreas K. Hüttel dilfri...@gentoo.org Gentoo Linux developer (council, toolchain, base-system, perl, libreoffice)
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
