914897: Clarify packaging infra debt

diff --git a/914897_merged_usr/ballot.md b/914897_merged_usr/ballot.md
index bef8ead393931ed93925e76824ec9a941f823052..86aaeb030486729bd8019b903bddda96d8e4c1fd 100644 (file)
--- a/914897_merged_usr/ballot.md
+++ b/914897_merged_usr/ballot.md
@@ -7,7 +7,7 @@ The motivation to get Debian systems to converge towards such a scheme is vastly
 
 * having separate `/` and `/usr` filesystems has been useful in the past for booting without initramfs onto a minimal root filesystem that carried just enough to mount the `/usr` filesystem later in the boot process. Given the evolution of physical hosts' capabilities, initramfs'es have been default in Debian (and elsewhere) for a long time, and most systems no longer have an intermediate state during boot in which they have only `/`, but not `/usr`, mounted. Booting hosts through that intermediate state is not systematically tested in Debian anymore.
 * another use-case is to share system files from `/usr` between hosts (over a network link) or containers (locally) which use different data or configuration. Having all software under `/usr` (instead of spread between `/` and `/usr`) makes the centralized update and the sharing easier.
-* the packaging infrastructure to install files outside of `/usr` is not standard and represents technical debt:
+* the packaging infrastructure to install files outside of `/usr` (e.g. installing libs under `/lib` instead of `/usr/lib`) is not standard and represents technical debt.
 * given its status as remnant "folklore", the distinction between what _needs_ to be shipped in `/` and what can stay in `/usr` is often interpreted arbitrarily;
 * allowing shipment of identically-named libraries or binaries in different paths can confuse common understanding of paths precedence.