On Mon, 19 Nov 2018 09:20:58 +0100, KatolaZ wrote in message
<20181119082058.dzvrnwrwy3ji5tpm@???>:

> On Mon, Nov 19, 2018 at 02:11:34AM +0100, Arnt Karlsen wrote:
> > On Sun, 18 Nov 2018 20:52:26 +0000, Simon wrote in message
> > <3A91E5C4-1603-40B5-B560-3F8BC8945865@???>:
> >
> > > golinux@??? wrote:
> > >

> > > > Sooooo . . . if the choice to avoid the merge is only available
> > > > with debian-installer what does that mean for the live isos?
> > > > Will they be configured with or without the merge as
> > > > default?    

> > >
> > > Does it make any difference at all on a live ISO ? If it's setup
> > > merged, then anything referencing /bin (etc) will follow the
> > > symlink and access /usr/bin (etc). However, as the default for
> > > Devuan seems likely to be unmerged, then it would make sense for
> > > the live ISOs to be the same. Scripts etc will have to be written
> > > to deal with the unmerged (split) layout so nothing should break
> > > that way - unless the script is written by someone assuming that
> > > nothing in the world runs unsplit any more. Any such scripts will
> > > need fixing to run on installed systems anyway, so would then run
> > > on a live ISO with split directories.
> >
> > ..worth noting here that some like to use live iso|usb to rescue
> > systems, or even as system installers, so our live iso|usbs should
> > be like our target systems.
> >
>
> This is just inconsequential: you can easily have a non-usr-merged
> live fs which installs on a usr-merged target.
>
> KISS

..precisely, now let the usr-merged fanbois show us usr-merged live
iso installers install correctly on non-usr-merged targets. ;o)

--
..med vennlig hilsen = with Kind Regards from Arnt Karlsen
...with a number of polar bear hunters in his ancestry...
Scenarios always come in sets of three:
best case, worst case, and just in case.