On Feb 18, Simon McVittie <smcv@debian.org> wrote: > No. Sorry, I phrased that badly. The consensus that I think we have is: > we are no longer attempting to support systems booting without /usr > mounted, and therefore it is not a bug if programs and libraries on the > rootfs have dependencies in /usr. (That's a less strong guarantee than > the one you are probably hoping for.) We do not just have a consensus, this has also been a fact for a long time now: kmod (25-2) unstable; urgency=medium * Moved the libraries to /usr/lib/. (Closes: #894566) -- Marco d'Itri <md@linux.it> Sat, 17 Nov 2018 01:56:00 +0100 > However, it doesn't give us a solution for what should happen to things > that are canonically on the root filesystem and *do* have their absolute > paths hard-coded somewhere, most critically /lib*/ld*.so.* and /bin/sh. This does not matter as long as we have to support un-merged-/usr systems. > I think some people (perhaps including Guillem?) might be advocating > including executables in the second mechanism described above by > moving them, on a per-package basis, to the root filesystem, and > creating compatibility symlinks on the root filesystem if it has not > undergone the /usr merge, like /bin/plymouth -> /usr/bin/plymouth and > /sbin/iptables -> /usr/sbin/iptables. However, so far, this is rare > (plymouth and iptables are among only a few examples on my laptop) > and if adopted, it seems likely to be a slow transition: most of the Slow, and also a lot of work for no significant benefits. -- ciao, Marco
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature