[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Bug#985502: release-notes: suggestions for usrmerge section



Paul Gevers wrote:
>> I'd forgotten the *Buster* release notes *do* mention usrmerge:
>> 
>> https://www.debian.org/releases/buster/amd64/release-notes/ch-whats-new.html#merged-usr
>> 
>> but we've taken that part out now.  Could we perhaps recycle the
>> phrase "the usrmerge package exists to do the conversion if desired"?
> 
> Sounds like a plan.

That would give us something like the attached...
-- 
JBR	with qualifications in linguistics, experience as a Debian
	sysadmin, and probably no clue about this particular package
diff --git a/en/issues.dbk b/en/issues.dbk
index 4377402b..f926c775 100644
--- a/en/issues.dbk
+++ b/en/issues.dbk
@@ -231,12 +231,18 @@ information mentioned in <xref linkend="morereading"/>.
 
       <listitem>
         <para>
-	  Historically there was a reason to split root level
-	  <filename>bin</filename>, <filename>sbin</filename> and
-	  <filename>lib</filename> directories into
-	  <filename>/usr/</filename>, but that is no more. Debian
-	  bullseye will be the last Debian release that supports the
-	  non-merged-usr layout.
+          The historical justifications for the filesystem layout with
+          <filename>/bin</filename>, <filename>/sbin</filename>, and
+          <filename>/lib</filename> directories separate from their
+          equivalents under <filename>/usr</filename> no longer apply
+          today; see the <ulink
+          url="https://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/TheCaseForTheUsrMerge";>Freedesktop.org
+          summary</ulink>. Debian bullseye will be the last Debian
+          release that supports the non-merged-usr layout; for systems
+          with a legacy layout that have been upgraded without a
+          reinstall, the <systemitem
+          role="package">usrmerge</systemitem> package exists to do
+          the conversion if desired.
         </para>
       </listitem>
 

Reply to: