FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Gentoo > Gentoo Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-04-2012, 02:54 PM
Ciaran McCreesh
 
Default rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 16:51:12 +0100
Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
> /bin/systemctl
> libdbus-1.so.3 => /usr/lib64/libdbus-1.so.3

Here is a prime example of why "vertical integration" should really be
called "a horrible mess of tight coupling"...

Remember how people used to make fun of Windows when it would fail to
boot if you broke Internet Explorer?

--
Ciaran McCreesh
 
Old 01-04-2012, 03:02 PM
Michał Górny
 
Default rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 15:54:07 +0000
Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@googlemail.com> wrote:

> On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 16:51:12 +0100
> Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > /bin/systemctl
> > libdbus-1.so.3 => /usr/lib64/libdbus-1.so.3

Considering that I really thought about stripping that one because
otherwise people will not even notice the other page of results.


--
Best regards,
Michał Górny
 
Old 01-04-2012, 03:33 PM
Fabian Groffen
 
Default rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

On 04-01-2012 16:37:34 +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
> > And this part was not about the movement to /usr at all, so why do you
> > suggest another movement here? And while you answer that, please also
> > tell us, why you want to migrate packages to a different install
> > location without a need.
>
> Because we need to finally be able to fix mistakes made in the past
> by other people.

What mistakes?

> > They install and work fine, so just keep it this way. I did not see
> > any argument to move packages around, that work well and have no
> > issue with their current install location.
>
> What if, say, upstream introduces pkg-config file where our hacks will
> cause it to be installed into /lib/pkgconfig? Should we then expand
> the hack to cover that, and something else, and then another thing...

Highly unlikely, but if it happens, easy to fix, so not really a
convincing issue.


--
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level
 
Old 01-04-2012, 03:47 PM
Michał Górny
 
Default rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 17:33:15 +0100
Fabian Groffen <grobian@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On 04-01-2012 16:37:34 +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
> > > And this part was not about the movement to /usr at all, so why
> > > do you suggest another movement here? And while you answer that,
> > > please also tell us, why you want to migrate packages to a
> > > different install location without a need.
> >
> > Because we need to finally be able to fix mistakes made in the past
> > by other people.
>
> What mistakes?

The mistake of introducing a pointless separation based on a rule
of thumb which becomes more and more blurry over time, and hacking
packages just to make it work.

--
Best regards,
Michał Górny
 
Old 01-04-2012, 04:12 PM
Ulrich Mueller
 
Default rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

>>>>> On Wed, 4 Jan 2012, Michał Górny wrote:

>> What mistakes?

> The mistake of introducing a pointless separation based on a rule of
> thumb which becomes more and more blurry over time, and hacking
> packages just to make it work.

There's really nothing pointless or blurry about this separation.
The FHS has a nice definition: "The contents of the root filesystem
must be adequate to boot, restore, recover, and/or repair the system."

Ulrich
 
Old 01-04-2012, 04:32 PM
Olivier Crête
 
Default rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 18:12 +0100, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> >>>>> On Wed, 4 Jan 2012, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> >> What mistakes?
>
> > The mistake of introducing a pointless separation based on a rule of
> > thumb which becomes more and more blurry over time, and hacking
> > packages just to make it work.
>
> There's really nothing pointless or blurry about this separation.
> The FHS has a nice definition: "The contents of the root filesystem
> must be adequate to boot, restore, recover, and/or repair the system."

The problem is that to boot a modern system, you need a shitload of
stuff. For example, modern network filesystems often have secure
authentication and probably LDAP too, so that means we need to move ldap
and openssl into / and all the dependencies. Also, anything that
installs a udev rule needs to be in /, and the list goes on an on. Very
soon, you have almost everything in /...

This rule made sense in the 80s, but it doesn't match the modern world
anymore.

Some longer explanations:
http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/separate-usr-is-broken
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/UsrMove

Here is a list of packages on your system that will break if you start
udev without /usr mounted:

egrep 'usb-db|pci-db|FROM_DATABASE|/usr' /*/udev/rules.d/* |cut -f 1
-d : | sort -u | xargs qfile -e


--
Olivier Crête
tester@gentoo.org
Gentoo Developer
 
Old 01-04-2012, 04:40 PM
Olivier Crête
 
Default rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 15:54 +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 16:51:12 +0100
> Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > /bin/systemctl
> > libdbus-1.so.3 => /usr/lib64/libdbus-1.so.3
>
> Here is a prime example of why "vertical integration" should really be
> called "a horrible mess of tight coupling"...

You clearly have failed to realize that d-bus is a now the bus for
system messaging and is as much part of the system as syslog or bash.
Probably even more so, for example, in Fedora 17, you'll be able to boot
without syslog or bash, but you need d-bus.

--
Olivier Crête
tester@gentoo.org
Gentoo Developer
 
Old 01-04-2012, 05:06 PM
Ciaran McCreesh
 
Default rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 12:40:10 -0500
Olivier Crête <tester@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 15:54 +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 16:51:12 +0100
> > Michał Górny <mgorny@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > > /bin/systemctl
> > > libdbus-1.so.3 => /usr/lib64/libdbus-1.so.3
> >
> > Here is a prime example of why "vertical integration" should really
> > be called "a horrible mess of tight coupling"...
>
> You clearly have failed to realize that d-bus is a now the bus for
> system messaging and is as much part of the system as syslog or bash.
> Probably even more so, for example, in Fedora 17, you'll be able to
> boot without syslog or bash, but you need d-bus.

No, I realise full well that some GnomeOS developers would like us to
think that HAL, D-BUS, network-manager, udev-extras etc are part of the
system, and are sloppily writing code that makes that assumption.
However, the question ultimately under discussion is whether Gentoo is
to be a Linux distribution or a GnomeOS distribution.

--
Ciaran McCreesh
 
Old 01-04-2012, 05:16 PM
"Robin H. Johnson"
 
Default rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 03:19:57PM +0000, Steven J Long wrote:
> I could swear we were told in prior discussions on this list that a separate
> /usr partition is not considered supported by upstream udev, but searching
> all I can find is that an initramfs is required.[1]
The upstream statement was more specifically that: starting udev (or
systemd) without /usr available was not considered supported.

If /usr is on a separate partition, this is forcing us down the
initramfs route (If fsck ends up on /usr, the only way to fsck /usr is
from an extra copy in the initramfs...).

--
Robin Hugh Johnson
Gentoo Linux: Developer, Trustee & Infrastructure Lead
E-Mail : robbat2@gentoo.org
GnuPG FP : 11ACBA4F 4778E3F6 E4EDF38E B27B944E 34884E85
 
Old 01-04-2012, 05:26 PM
Marc Schiffbauer
 
Default rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr

* Olivier Crête schrieb am 04.01.12 um 18:32 Uhr:
> On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 18:12 +0100, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > >>>>> On Wed, 4 Jan 2012, Michał Górny wrote:
> >
> > >> What mistakes?
> >
> > > The mistake of introducing a pointless separation based on a rule of
> > > thumb which becomes more and more blurry over time, and hacking
> > > packages just to make it work.
> >
> > There's really nothing pointless or blurry about this separation.
> > The FHS has a nice definition: "The contents of the root filesystem
> > must be adequate to boot, restore, recover, and/or repair the system."
>
> The problem is that to boot a modern system, you need a shitload of
> stuff.

To boot the system on its highest level: yes. But Linux/UNIX systems
have a concept called runlevels that can perfectly cover cases where
this "shitload of stuff" is not required.

For example, to make that FHS definition be reality there are (can
be) runlevels that will only boot a system with all basic stuff
required to mount the rootfs and make root being able to login to
the local text console. These are the things that make a unixoid
system valuable over other kind of systems.

> For example, modern network filesystems often have secure
> authentication and probably LDAP too, so that means we need to move ldap
> and openssl into / and all the dependencies. Also, anything that
> installs a udev rule needs to be in /, and the list goes on an on. Very
> soon, you have almost everything in /...

You do not need everything to make a system boot some sort of
recovery-console for example.

>
> This rule made sense in the 80s, but it doesn't match the modern world
> anymore.

Why? The benefits to keep a system bootable and repairable is one of
the reasons why unix systems are more robust or can better be
repeaired than, lets say windows systems for example.

I do not like the idea to throw away all those benefits just because
so many (younger/newer) people do not know about the possibilities
an "old fashioned" unix system tends to have.

-Marc
--
8AAC 5F46 83B4 DB70 8317 3723 296C 6CCA 35A6 4134
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 11:27 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org