On Wed, 2019-10-16 at 11:18 +0200, Jaco Kroon wrote: > Hi, > > On 2019/10/15 19:34, David Seifert wrote: > > On Tue, 2019-10-15 at 12:04 -0400, Mike Gilbert wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 12:02 PM Mike Gilbert <flop...@gentoo.org > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > On Tue, Oct 15, 2019 at 8:00 AM David Seifert <s...@gentoo.org> > > > > wrote: > > > > > On Sun, 2019-10-13 at 12:33 -0400, Mike Gilbert wrote: > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 1:52 PM David Seifert < > > > > > > s...@gentoo.org> > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > On Sat, 2019-10-12 at 19:01 +0200, Dennis Schridde wrote: > > > > > > > > On Samstag, 12. Oktober 2019 18:02:28 CEST William > > > > > > > > Hubbs > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > On Sat, Oct 12, 2019 at 01:11:49PM +0200, Michał > > > > > > > > > Górny > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > On Sat, 2019-10-12 at 13:00 +0200, David Seifert > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > * Some distros have not just merged / and /usr, > > > > > > > > > > > they > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > have also merged /usr/bin and /usr/sbin. By > > > > > > > > > > > giving > > > > > > > > > > > users the choice of merging */bin and */sbin, > > > > > > > > > > > Gentoo follows suit. > > > > > > > > > > What about the scenario when /bin has been merged > > > > > > > > > > with > > > > > > > > > > /usr/sbin > > > > > > > > > > and /sbin with /usr/bin? ;-P > > > > > > > > > I also don't see the need for something like this. > > > > > > > > > The > > > > > > > > > idea of > > > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > > /usr > > > > > > > > > merge is to have all binaries available in one place, > > > > > > > > > and > > > > > > > > > there > > > > > > > > > really > > > > > > > > > is not a good justification for separating bin from > > > > > > > > > sbin. > > > > > > > > Do I read this correctly? USE=-split-usr currently > > > > > > > > means > > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > /bin, > > > > > > > > /sbin, / > > > > > > > > usr/bin and /usr/sbin point to the same directory? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If that is not the case, then I agree that users should > > > > > > > > have the > > > > > > > > possibility > > > > > > > > to set it up like this and USE=-split-sbin should be > > > > > > > > supported. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --Dennis > > > > > > > I agree, I wasn't aware that USE=-split-usr implies the > > > > > > > complete 2- > > > > > > > level (/usr and *sbin) merge. In that case, all of this > > > > > > > is > > > > > > > obsolete. > > > > > > That was NOT my intention when I introduced the split-usr > > > > > > USE > > > > > > flag. > > > > > > > > > > > > For bin/sbin, I would prefer to drop any conflicting links > > > > > > unconditionally. Do you have examples of scenarios where > > > > > > this > > > > > > is not > > > > > > possible? > > > > > > > > > > > William has confirmed on IRC that USE=-split-usr performs the > > > > > complete > > > > > Fedora-esque /usr merge (which makes sense IMO). > > > > William's opinion is not the only one that matters. > > > Sorry, I guess you are referring to the behavior baselayout? That > > > doesn't necessarily align with the global usage. > > > > > https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/baselayout.git/tree/Makefile#n93 > > > > Clearly the usr-merge in baselayout intends to merge all these 4 > > directories. There is currently no option to merge /usr and / but > > keep > > /bin and /sbin separate, so the most parsimonious solution here is > > to > > assume that usr-merge semantics in Gentoo is about merging all 4 > > directories. > > > > > For what it's worth. All of my systems are installed with a fixed- > size > 512MB / with everything else (including /usr) on separate LVs. > > Whilst sbin vs bin is just a matter of what's available, to me it > makes > sense to keep these split. To me it's always been logical to keep > administrative type (root) tools under sbin, and stuff that's > generally > useful for users under bin. > > Keeping / and /usr split (or the ability to keep it split) is rather > crucial for me. It's for historic installations a matter of space > constraints on /. For new installations it's a matter of keeping / > as > small as possible in order to have a smallish bootable system which > can > be used for recovering the rest of the system, ideally without an > initrd > (which also works to an extent). > > Kind Regards, > Jaco >
For the umpteenth time time: nothing will change. You can keep your (albeit broken) separate / and /usr partitions. *NOTHING* will change for anyone. There are no plans to change the defaults. This is *MERELY* about giving people the chance to opt in to the /usr-merge. That said, the idea of using / as a "recovery" filesystem in general is broken: https://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/separate-usr-is-broken/ And no, this is not systemd breaking your system, or Lennart, it's distros and userlands not being careful to have things in / never depend on things in /usr.
