Re: support for merged /usr in Debian
Marco d'Itri writes ("Re: support for merged /usr in Debian"):
> On Jan 05, Ian Jackson <ijackson@chiark.greenend.org.uk> wrote:
> > or which do mount /usr using / rather than initramfs, or some such.
>
> And this has already not been supported for many years, even if it works
> in some cases, so it does not matter because it is hard to ask to keep
> support for an already unsupported configuration.
People who have been using a configuration for many years naturally
become upset when they are told that it has been `unsupported' for all
of this time and that, implicitly, changes are going to be made which
will break it.
It is this kind of apparent proposal to nonconsensually impose changes
which is generating upset.
> > That does not mean that every user has to have a separate /usr or that
> > /usr can't be mounted by the default initramfs. It does mean that
> > package maintainers need to continue to place files in / or /usr as
> > appropriate, respond approprately to reasonable bug reports, etc.
>
> As explained, we stopped doing this long ago since it is hard work with
> no significant benefits.
This seems to be mostly rhetoric rather than fact.
This thread contains a fair few assertions that certain configurations
are `broken' or `unsupported'; but these assertions sit alongside
reports from actual users that these configurations do work for them,
and expressions of the wish that they should continue to do so.
Ian.
Reply to: