On Thu, Apr 7, 2016 at 11:12 AM, Duncan <1i5t5.dun...@cox.net> wrote: > William Hubbs posted on Thu, 07 Apr 2016 09:40:49 -0500 as excerpted: > >> After the testing period is over, I'm confused about why we should >> support both layouts. With separate usr without initramfs gone, the usr >> merge is transparent to end users because of the symbolic links in /, so >> there should be no reason to keep supporting both layouts once we are >> satisfied with the migration process. > > Because we're Gentoo, and gentooers tend to have rather strong opinions > on what sort of choices we should be able to make about things like that. >
I'm trying to think of whether offering a choice really costs us anything. The main issue I see here is that the compatibility symlinks only go one way. #!/bin/bash will work whether you've done a usr merge or not #!/usr/bin/bash will probably only work if you've done the usr merge #!/usr/bin/python will work whether you've done a usr merge or not #!/bin/python will probably only work if you've done the usr merge It seems like a bit of a challenge to try to make sure that all your links are to wherever the original package tries to install files when on the system you are developing/testing on everything is in one place. We could of course require that maintainers accept patches to fix these kinds of broken links if they're offered, but users would be more likely to run into temporary breakage if they didn't use the merge unless we can come up with a way to offer compatibility in both directions. Unless there is a bigger problem lurking it probably still should be up to the user. -- Rich
