Re: merged /usr considered harmful (was Re: Bits from the Technical Committee)
On Sun, Jul 18, 2021 at 11:31:07PM +0200, Svante Signell wrote: Hi, is it OK to forward your mail to debian-devel. I don't think mailing to debian-user will have any effect on this issue? No, I don't think it's appropriate to try and recruit an army from other mailing lists to try and prop up your particular side in an argument, or to drown out developer discussions with noise. Polyna-Maude is a user, not a developer, who doesn't fully understand the usrmerge issue, and this list seems a perfectly appropriate place for a user to ask questions to better understand an issue like this one. -- Please do not CC me for listmail. Jonathan Dowland ✎j...@debian.org https://jmtd.net
Re: merged /usr considered harmful (was Re: Bits from the Technical Committee)
Hi. On Sun, Jul 18, 2021 at 07:16:30PM -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote: > > > Will the merge-usr cause myself problem ? > > You would end up with an empty partition, and possibly an overflowed > root partition, if you made the root partition too small to hold all > of the content from /usr. It other way around actually. While called usrmerge, the package actually moves /bin, /sbin and /lib* to /usr. So it's the overflow of /usr the OP should worry about, not /. Moreover, the separate /usr is considered by the upstream an important feature - [1], as it allows the local administrator to have read-write / and read-only /usr, and possibly - shared /usr along the several hosts (involves NFS or equivalent, and dracut). Thus this feature is unlikely to go away in the nearest future, at least. The only problem with usrmerge I've encountered so far is broken "dpkg -S". For instance, "dpkg -S /usr/bin/bash" fails, because "bash" package provides "bash" as "/bin/bash". And of course, "which bash" shows me "/usr/bin/bash". [1] https://access.redhat.com/solutions/2146081 Reco
Re: merged /usr considered harmful (was Re: Bits from the Technical Committee)
Hi, On 2021-07-18 7:21 p.m., Andy Smith wrote: > Hi, > > On Sun, Jul 18, 2021 at 05:54:33PM -0400, Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside > wrote: >> On 2021-07-18 5:07 p.m., Andy Smith wrote: >>> I recommend understanding the issue before putting forth an opinion. >>> >> Maybe I shall correct what I said as it may be misunderstood. > > It's unclear to me why you've taken my reply to your mail on > debian-user, and instead sent it to me privately and also to > debian-devel. > I've sent my mail to debian-devel because I was suggested to do so because it would be a better place than debian-user. > As neither of us are Debian Developers and you don't seem to have > done much research regarding merged-/usr, I don't feel it is > on-topic for me to continue that conversation with you on > debian-devel. > > I recommend doing some more reading of these threads and the > relevant wiki pages and if things are still unclear then asking > user-level questions only on debian-user. > > Thanks, > Andy > -- Polyna-Maude R.-Summerside -Be smart, Be wise, Support opensource development OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: merged /usr considered harmful (was Re: Bits from the Technical Committee)
On Sun 18 Jul 2021 at 19:16:30 -0400, Greg Wooledge wrote: > On Sun, Jul 18, 2021 at 11:31:07PM +0200, Svante Signell wrote: > > Hi, is it OK to forward your mail to debian-devel. I don't think > > mailing to debian-user will have any effect on this issue? > > What issue? -devel are presently having a re-run of a TC decision. https://lists.debian.org/debian-devel/2021/07/msg00126.html -- Brian.
Re: merged /usr considered harmful (was Re: Bits from the Technical Committee)
On Sun, Jul 18, 2021 at 11:31:07PM +0200, Svante Signell wrote: > Hi, is it OK to forward your mail to debian-devel. I don't think > mailing to debian-user will have any effect on this issue? What issue? > On Sun, 2021-07-18 at 16:31 -0400, Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside > wrote: > > I currently have a different partition for my /usr and this has been > > the > > case since the end of 1990s when I started on Linux. Maybe I'm wrong > > but > > I like it this way. This is supported up to and including Debian 11, according to the wiki. > > Will the merge-usr cause myself problem ? You would end up with an empty partition, and possibly an overflowed root partition, if you made the root partition too small to hold all of the content from /usr. Without knowing the sizes and fullnesses of your partitions, we can't guess whether you will have a problem. But in any case, it doesn't sound like installing usrmerge would be a good idea for you on this system. It certainly offers you no benefits.
Re: merged /usr considered harmful (was Re: Bits from the Technical Committee)
Hi, is it OK to forward your mail to debian-devel. I don't think mailing to debian-user will have any effect on this issue? On Sun, 2021-07-18 at 16:31 -0400, Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside wrote: > Hi, > > > > But in any case, given that merged-usr-via-aliased-dirs is not > > > really > > > supported by dpkg anyway, it is broken by design [B], I have no > > > intention whatsoever to break any of my systems with such layout > > > going forward, I'm thus planning to spend any necessary volunteer > > > time implementing any fix, workaround or solution required to > > > avoid > > > having to use it, in detriment of other Debian volunteer time. I > > > alreadystarted some time ago with dpkg-fsys-usrunmess(8), present > > > already inthe upcoming bullseye release. > > > > > [B] > > https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Dpkg/FAQ#Q:_Does_dpkg_support_merged-.2Fusr-via-aliased-dirs.3F > > > > Since the dpkg developer and maintainer Guillem considers merged > > /usr > > broken by design, maybe Debian should consider to use some other > > package management software for the peace of mind for people > > involved > > in the project? Maybe guix could be usable? > > > > > > I only got part of this conversation (and possibly some mess). > My personal opinion is that Debian is going into a mostly "we got the > best idea in the world but forgot that not everyone implement things > the > same way". > > Those really good technology like Betacam, Audio DVD and other tech- > failed. > > I currently have a different partition for my /usr and this has been > the > case since the end of 1990s when I started on Linux. Maybe I'm wrong > but > I like it this way. > > Will the merge-usr cause myself problem ? > > If so, I'm willing to give a hand investing time to make something > that > is not "merge-usr". > > Thanks
Re: merged /usr considered harmful (was Re: Bits from the Technical Committee)
Hello, On Sun, Jul 18, 2021 at 04:31:11PM -0400, Polyna-Maude Racicot-Summerside wrote: > My personal opinion is that Debian is going into a mostly "we got the > best idea in the world but forgot that not everyone implement things the > same way". I recommend understanding the issue before putting forth an opinion. > I currently have a different partition for my /usr and this has been the > case since the end of 1990s when I started on Linux. Maybe I'm wrong but > I like it this way. > > Will the merge-usr cause myself problem ? No. Not as long as you use an initramfs created by any of the supported Debian tools like initramfs-tools or dracut, which you will do unless you have gone out of your way to do something different. And regardless of merged-/usr, /usr on separate partition has not been supported in Debian without an initramfs since the stretch release in 2017. I think all of this is quite clearly explained in: https://salsa.debian.org/md/usrmerge/raw/master/debian/README.Debian which is linked from: https://wiki.debian.org/UsrMerge If you think it's not then you should probably raise a bug against the usrmerge package with your suggested edits/clarifications. Andy -- https://bitfolk.com/ -- No-nonsense VPS hosting
Re: merged /usr considered harmful (was Re: Bits from the Technical Committee)
Hi, >> But in any case, given that merged-usr-via-aliased-dirs is not really >> supported by dpkg anyway, it is broken by design [B], I have no >> intention whatsoever to break any of my systems with such layout >> going forward, I'm thus planning to spend any necessary volunteer >> time implementing any fix, workaround or solution required to avoid >> having to use it, in detriment of other Debian volunteer time. I >> alreadystarted some time ago with dpkg-fsys-usrunmess(8), present >> already inthe upcoming bullseye release. >> > [B] > https://wiki.debian.org/Teams/Dpkg/FAQ#Q:_Does_dpkg_support_merged-.2Fusr-via-aliased-dirs.3F >> > > Since the dpkg developer and maintainer Guillem considers merged /usr > broken by design, maybe Debian should consider to use some other > package management software for the peace of mind for people involved > in the project? Maybe guix could be usable? > > I only got part of this conversation (and possibly some mess). My personal opinion is that Debian is going into a mostly "we got the best idea in the world but forgot that not everyone implement things the same way". Those really good technology like Betacam, Audio DVD and other tech-failed. I currently have a different partition for my /usr and this has been the case since the end of 1990s when I started on Linux. Maybe I'm wrong but I like it this way. Will the merge-usr cause myself problem ? If so, I'm willing to give a hand investing time to make something that is not "merge-usr". Thanks -- Polyna-Maude R.-Summerside -Be smart, Be wise, Support opensource development OpenPGP_signature Description: OpenPGP digital signature
