From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8768E59CAF for ; Sat, 9 Apr 2016 05:32:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BAB1021C080; Sat, 9 Apr 2016 05:32:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com (ironport2-out.teksavvy.com [206.248.154.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DFC6D21C04F for ; Sat, 9 Apr 2016 05:32:27 +0000 (UTC) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0BoDQA731xV/zOBWxdcgxCBMsswBAICgTw9EAEBAQEBAQGBCkEFg10BAQQ6HDMLIRMSDwUlN4gszyMBAQEHAgEfizqFDBaDAYEWAQSdb4d4jx0jgWaCLiIxgkcBAQE X-IPAS-Result: A0BoDQA731xV/zOBWxdcgxCBMsswBAICgTw9EAEBAQEBAQGBCkEFg10BAQQ6HDMLIRMSDwUlN4gszyMBAQEHAgEfizqFDBaDAYEWAQSdb4d4jx0jgWaCLiIxgkcBAQE X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.13,465,1427774400"; d="scan'208";a="205632584" Received: from 23-91-129-51.cpe.pppoe.ca (HELO waltdnes.org) ([23.91.129.51]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with SMTP; 09 Apr 2016 01:32:27 -0400 Received: by waltdnes.org (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Sat, 09 Apr 2016 01:32:30 -0400 From: waltdnes@waltdnes.org Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2016 01:32:30 -0400 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] usr merge Message-ID: <20160409053230.GA16529@waltdnes.org> References: <57087E0D.3090502@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <57087E0D.3090502@gmail.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) X-Archives-Salt: 7d02cee0-c64b-4729-a2d3-5abd46fcb67c X-Archives-Hash: 392f0cabaceb242d325052e3b6de2bce On Fri, Apr 08, 2016 at 11:59:09PM -0400, Damien Levac wrote > > > Seriously... how many people run Bluetooth keyboards on Gentoo > > anyways? > > That you ask such a question is concerning to me. Are we > discriminating against normal desktop users now? Here's the item that really bugs me... before - many people successfully used separate /usr, without initramfs. A few edge cases, e.g. people with bluetooth keyboards, had to use initramfs if they wanted a separate /usr. The poor darlings felt left out because they had to do extra setup work, versus the other 95%. now - an arbitrary decree comes down that *EVERYBODY* who wants a separate /usr needs to have initramfs. * IT DOES NOT MAKE THINGS ANY EASIER FOR THE ORIGINAL 5% EDGE CASES *. But the other 95% who could run separate /usr are now being told they must run initramfs "just because". What does it accomplish? BTW, I'm still running a separate /usr without initramfs, and no related problems; thank you. If I decided to go to an edge-case setup (e.g. Bluetooth keyboard, or ell partitions encrypted) then I could understand being asked to run initramfs. This is reminiscent of the "Mozilla Mentality", where everybody is forced to the lowest common denominator. Yes, a desktop GUI sucks on a tablet/smartphone; I get it. So Firefox was saddled with the smartphone-oriented Atrocious^H^H^H^H^H^H Australis GUI, which sucks on a desktop. That was the last straw that drove me to Pale Moon. -- Walter Dnes I don't run "desktop environments"; I run useful applications