First, I hear your frustration.
I suspect that our current path is going to lead to a fair bit of pain,
sufficient even that I expect us to make some changes after the release
of buster. Swallowing that will be hard, but I tend to think we're
being somewhat narrow in which requirements are
On Sun, 2019-02-24 at 09:23:14 -0500, Sam Hartman wrote:
> > "Guillem" == Guillem Jover writes:
> Guillem> On Sun, 2019-02-24 at 08:27:20 +0100, Ansgar wrote:
> >> Guillem Jover writes: > You are still conflating the concept with
> >> the deployment. The > underlaying properties
> "Guillem" == Guillem Jover writes:
Guillem> On Sun, 2019-02-24 at 08:27:20 +0100, Ansgar wrote:
>> Guillem Jover writes: > You are still conflating the concept with
>> the deployment. The > underlaying properties of merging /usr is
>> that the contents for > directories
On Sun, 2019-02-24 at 08:27:20 +0100, Ansgar wrote:
> Guillem Jover writes:
> > You are still conflating the concept with the deployment. The
> > underlaying properties of merging /usr is that the contents for
> > directories that are present in both / and /usr get merged into
> > /usr.
>
> No,
Guillem Jover writes:
> On Tue, 2019-02-19 at 08:54:12 +0100, Ansgar wrote:
>> Guillem Jover writes:
>> > 3) Switching packages to the merged-/usr layout could have been
>> >accomplished automatically via debhelper for a coverage of around
>> >99% (?) of the archive. With something along
On Tue, 2019-02-19 at 08:54:12 +0100, Ansgar wrote:
> Guillem Jover writes:
> > 3) Switching packages to the merged-/usr layout could have been
> >accomplished automatically via debhelper for a coverage of around
> >99% (?) of the archive. With something along the lines of:
> >
> >
Guillem Jover writes:
> 3) Switching packages to the merged-/usr layout could have been
>accomplished automatically via debhelper for a coverage of around
>99% (?) of the archive. With something along the lines of:
>
> ,---
> D=debian/tmp
> for d in /bin /sbin /lib; do
>
7 matches
Mail list logo
