Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Let's redesign the entire filesystem!

[Joshua Kinard <kumba@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1727 bytes --]

On 03/14/2012 19:44, Greg KH wrote:

> 
> Oh, and somehow "consensus" will work?  No, sorry, it will not.


If compelling arguments were used, yes, you can sometimes trigger people to
change their minds and arrive at a consensus.  But outright dismissing them
as if that will make them disappear is what won't work.


> So it's not a "we know best", it's a "it will not properly work
> otherwise."


Udev is the only package I have installed in my VM setup that fails at boot
with a separate /usr and no initramfs.  And that isn't even a fatal failure,
but it is a failure none the less, at least by virtue of OpenRC flagging the
fact that udev returned an error code.  Everything else works fine.

But it's not udev that is broke, is it?  It's my setup, right?  I've been
wrong for the last 10 years?  Why was this ever referenced then in the
Security Handbook?  See Code Listing 1.1:

http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/security/security-handbook.xml?part=1&chap=4


> It is strange to watch people somehow think that if they complain
> enough, or feel strongly enough, something is going to change here to
> make this basic fact go away.


It's human nature to complain or otherwise voice dissent, especially when
someone or something comes along and declares that what used to JustWork(TM)
now NoLongerWorks(TM).

Does that mean my dissent matters?  Probably not.  But that's not going to
stop me from trying.

-- 
Joshua Kinard
Gentoo/MIPS
kumba@gentoo.org
4096R/D25D95E3 2011-03-28

"The past tempts us, the present confuses us, the future frightens us.  And
our lives slip away, moment by moment, lost in that vast, terrible in-between."

--Emperor Turhan, Centauri Republic


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 834 bytes --]