Joel Roth via Dng - 26.11.23, 12:01:43 CET:
> On Sun, Nov 26, 2023 at 11:54:44AM +0100, Martin Steigerwald wrote:
> > Martin Steigerwald - 26.11.23, 11:49:24 CET:
[…]
> > I wonder whether the people behind merged usr ever fully thought about
> > the consequences of their proposal. Well… no, I do not wonder: They
> > did not. That much is obvious when I just briefly scan over above
> > document.
> I experimented for a time with gobolinux. They use symlinks
> extensively for backward compatibility in a new hierarchy
> that works very well. All the installed files of a program
> are stored under one directory, with symlinks wherever
> needed. gobo allows multiple versions of the same program to
> coexist. Removing a package is as simple as removing a
> single directory and cleaning up the dangling symlinks.
>
> Based on that experience, I imagine that merged /usr could
> work okay, although I wonder how this affects manually
> installed software.

Well I bet it will work.

I am also administering quite some Debian systems and aside from silly
things like "dpkg -S /usr/bin/bash" and some older shell scripts not
working, those systems for me basically work okay enough.

Now what I would like to have confirmation whether I have to usr-merge my
Devuan Ceres systems in order to continue for them to boot or whether that
note is just for Debian users.

I am not willing to do the usr-merge if its not strictly necessary, but if
necessary I will do it.

Right now this laptop with Devuan Ceres still boots okay without having
been usr-merged. I just don't want to risk having an unbootable system, so
if Devuan is not continuing to provide for the ability to have the system
unmerged, I will merge them.

I expect that to be the case, but before I do a merge, a confirmation that
it is necessary for Devuan Ceres would be nice. And again: I understand
it. I bet it would be way too much work to divert here.

So anyone can shed a light on this?

Ciao,
--
Martin