Per filesystem hierarchy, files installed in /bin, /lib and /sbin should be self-sufficient and not link to libraries installed in /usr. Such linking is invalid and makes the files unusable without /usr mounted.
This will all resolve itself when the / -> /usr migration happens.
Go ahead and open bugs and add them here though so we know which
packages need to be fixed.
Created attachment 298263 [details]
Script to find broken executables
Requires portage-utils but gives a nice sorted and grouped output.
Dupe of bug #245729?
*** Bug 245729 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
Was wondering - wouldn't it make sense to move their configuration files from /etc to /usr/etc , since there is also no point in keeping them in /etc, if they require /usr to be mounted first?
(In reply to Bjarke Istrup Pedersen from comment #5)
> Was wondering - wouldn't it make sense to move their configuration files
> from /etc to /usr/etc , since there is also no point in keeping them in
> /etc, if they require /usr to be mounted first?
Afaik in Unix philosphy /usr are the Unix Shared Resources - shared between several computers, e.g. via NFS. For that reason /usr has no directory for configuration files.
Created attachment 399992 [details]
Report on a uclibc-based system
I use a different script (because busybox ash does not like piping a for statement to another for) on my uclibc-based system a I get many binaries linking to the shared version of libgcc in /usr . Should I remove the shared library manually, then rebuild the affected packages, thus forcing the use of the static version?
I will not file a bug against app-shells/fish because this shell is really an interactive shell, not something you run scripts on it.
However, nano linking to libmagic deserves a bug report, in my opinion.