From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1RoiqM-0008UL-G2 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 21 Jan 2012 21:51:26 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 192D0E091A; Sat, 21 Jan 2012 21:51:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5FB51E08A6 for ; Sat, 21 Jan 2012 21:50:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.26.5] (ip98-164-193-252.oc.oc.cox.net [98.164.193.252]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: zmedico) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CE9A91B400B; Sat, 21 Jan 2012 21:50:50 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <4F1B3339.3090507@gentoo.org> Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2012 13:50:49 -0800 From: Zac Medico User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686 on x86_64; rv:8.0) Gecko/20111120 Thunderbird/8.0 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 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org CC: Dale Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: locations of binaries and separate /usr References: <4F0440B3.4090500@gentoo.org> <20120106160719.GB18959@fury> <201201080047.27281.polynomial-c@gentoo.org> <20120108103345.382b8db3@pomiocik.lan> <20120110181452.GA14155@mailgate.onlinehome-server.info> <20120110194640.7696d2c7@pomiocik.lan> <4F163EB2.8050700@gmail.com> <20120118080213.4f533693@pomiocik.lan> <4F1672A3.2040802@gmail.com> <20120118143613.4d9d67a8@pomiocik.lan> <4F1AAF86.1050503@gmail.com> <20120121155744.4f7cf423@pomiocik.lan> <4F1B2F6F.6020301@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4F1B2F6F.6020301@gmail.com> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.3.3 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 4e081dc5-2b23-43ff-9512-6ceecaf9249a X-Archives-Hash: ce0068d914fda59829e67fa1cb33e833 On 01/21/2012 01:34 PM, Dale wrote: > Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny wrote: >>> It's funny how I never needed one before either but now things are >>> being broken. It's not LVM that is breaking it either. I wouldn't >>> need the initramfs even if It was on a regular partition until the >>> recent so called "improvements." >> >> ...and your main argument is 'long, long ago someone decided that it >> should match the same taste as mine, so it should be like it forever'. >> Of course, those times there were no such thing as an initramfs... >> >=20 >=20 > Then don't break that. Just because someone came up with a initramfs > doesn't mean everyone should be forced to use one. The old way imposes requirements that are no longer supported by upstream software. So, you basically have three choices: 1) Use old software that supports the old way 2) Develop new software to support the old way 3) Use an initramfs or pre-init script to mount /usr if it must be on a separate partition --=20 Thanks, Zac