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 <gentoo-dev+bounces-50892-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
id 1SH1Xn-0005zo-Ie
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sun, 08 Apr 2012 23:29:15 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id F227CE0BE4;
Sun, 8 Apr 2012 23:28:48 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-bk0-f53.google.com (mail-bk0-f53.google.com [209.85.214.53])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5D5A6E09B6
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 8 Apr 2012 23:28:03 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by bkwj4 with SMTP id j4so3373689bkw.40
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 08 Apr 2012 16:28:02 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type
:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=v9c0V3q5BCxKlp+0l0JZrbzHYTyfakqCB/gc3sx4s6Y=;
b=lBf6oN8dzEFbuRcnn3wHF7q8c/OlU/Ja2F0rbZUHBZwk1Rh+4/VGbD/gWGyAYbPCAV
MVicmLfRZoaGJ5Cy2r4GshNq6X2ImXcH+SzQYzEXdfwPohkKCU6uA5MQFnQan5nqFycW
/EYds3oMHnll+gIiHR/SLcNq8nbjOi1x9CNnJTJElUTRDoca81W1WpwbRv+dKUTkixqF
MyvxbwEIqCz6FHNaUanCQ5voBQtROzfzyzpOe+pu5sNfrQRPRPDzVKDwMebG4LhcgTaL
ilMKg5z+VPzsB5Azd/5geq2gqFVZX4rqg/f/HLYF2Yn9tJvisa4TjqK0uuFH/ejs4vta
vjdA==
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.204.155.83 with SMTP id r19mr2323063bkw.123.1333927682472;
Sun, 08 Apr 2012 16:28:02 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com
Received: by 10.204.226.77 with HTTP; Sun, 8 Apr 2012 16:28:02 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20120408220422.GA26440@kroah.com>
References: <20353.41193.129711.306663@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de>
<20120408220422.GA26440@kroah.com>
Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2012 19:28:02 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: oX8QyksjIMUbmnLzp3jh5DT-iPE
Message-ID: <CAGfcS_mLRBCEuvs2gQu8Ov9XD2MoKmFjCn+giLFsLLnvikoYOw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-dev-announce] Council meeting summary
for 3 April 2012
From: Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Archives-Salt: b24dc9f2-15d1-42cd-9873-4989a5efd8bd
X-Archives-Hash: 94d77562a21c8c0a7de160626aade634
On Sun, Apr 8, 2012 at 6:04 PM, Greg KH <gregkh@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Sun, Apr 08, 2012 at 04:30:01PM +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>> The council has voted in favour of a separate /usr being supported
>> (5 yes, 1 no vote).
>
> What?
Perhaps the council should be the ones to clarify, but I think the
vote only was for separate /usr being supported. The irc log seemed a
bit more nuanced than perhaps came out in the summary. Maybe I'm
misreading it. I didn't see anything in the log about a decision that
newer versions of udev are not able to be stabled.
So, as to what "a separate /usr being supported" means, the impression
I got was "don't worry if you're running it, you'll have an upgrade
path." Right now it sounds like the proposed upgrade path is that
some devs will fork udev and keep it running more like the current one
(presumably breaking in the same situations that it already does
today).
> And udev isn't even the problem, all you need is to mount your /usr from
> initramfs. =A0So, the original proposal wasn't even a correct/valid
> proposal in the first place.
Well, as far as I can tell the proposal that was voted on didn't even
mention udev at all, or initramfs. But, as you point out using an
initramfs is likely to be more reliable.
I'm sure the same arguments were going around back when people were
advocating for dropping bootloader support in the kernel and telling
people to bugger_off_msg. An initramfs creates more flexibility, at
the cost of an extra layer of software, just like grub. The main
downside to it is that it tends to require more maintenance, though if
you build the necessary drivers to mount /usr into the kernel I
imagine that an initramfs would probably work across differing kernel
versions.
In any case, we should still be updating documentation/etc regardless.
A better guide to dracut/genkernel would be useful no matter how this
turns out. I'd like to see stable Gentoo stay current with udev in
any case, but I don't mind using a forked version as long as it is of
similar quality to the original. As you've pointed out already, that
may not actually help people with a separate /usr, so I'd encourage
people to get an initramfs working.
Rich