/usrmove?

[Ondrej Vasik]

On Fri, 2012-02-10 at 10:21 +0100, Harald Hoyer wrote:
> Am 10.02.2012 08:36, schrieb Ondrej Vasik:
> > Given the fact that there is NO ultimate gain from the usrmove feature
> > (ok, I understand all the arguments for the usrmove, but I don't see
> > them that bright at the moment as Harald and fastboot guys - e.g. the
> > compatibility of distro locations is not only in the locations of
> > binaries and we have much more differences in Fedora)
> 
> That's your personal opinion.. I tend to differ. Please read
> http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/TheCaseForTheUsrMerge again.

I already read that few times before and I understand all the things.
I'm not against usrmove feature - as I see the benefits - but I'm not a
big fan of it - as I see some of the negatives. It is really not that
painless how it was presented at the beginning.

But I'm against the style and timing how it was achieved. None of the
arguments in the systemd page usrmove cases is "we need it now" and it
can't wait for Fedora 18. All of them are personal opinions of you and
systemd guys - and as I said, they are mostly valid.

> > 
> > I really don't know why the REAL ACTIONS on this feature were started
> > that late in F17 release cycle - several months after branching.
> 
> Because politics took so long.

So it should have been moved to F18... I still see it very unfortunate,
but it reached that far that it could be only taken as a warning for
future releases distro-wide "features".

> > Only 3
> > weeks after the start of usrmove git commits you now have even F18 git
> > branch and F18 would have been MUCH better for it.
> > In addition, for mock builds of F17+ packages with usrmove support on
> > RHEL-6 systems you now need UNSUPPORTED rpm from Harald pages
> > ( http://people.redhat.com/harald/downloads/rpm/4.8.0-19.el6.0.usrmove.1/ ).
> 
> and? It will get in RHEL-6.3 ... SUPPORTED! That's a self inflicted wound,
> binding Fedora development to RHEL-6.

And? When will the RHEL-6.3 start being supported? After or before the
Fedora 17 release? That's a self inflicted wound, breaking Fedora-17+
package builders on non-Fedora systems.

Try to think about third parties using RHEL-6 (or different supported
rpmbased) mock builders for their third party packages and using Fedora
for the rest of non-critical jobs. It is not only about RHEL... I'm
quite sure there are such cases - and builds for Fedora-17 will be
broken for them unless they will use unsupported patched rpm.

Anyway, that's more for beer-meeting discussion next week ;).

Greetings,
         Ondrej Vasik