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 1S7xWV-0007J1-FB for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 23:22:27 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 423B9E0916; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 23:22:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-yx0-f181.google.com (mail-yx0-f181.google.com [209.85.213.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 150CCE08AB for ; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 23:21:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: by yenq2 with SMTP id q2so3031970yen.40 for ; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 16:21:44 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=IlyJNo+b4QPJJjv5IR0xL7OwYvsJOYyCh0V7ItspZco=; b=i+8JwGo9Cq1CGbtwUM/S3MkUZgdUuR/tUTXu5S0OQECP5HaZ9fNJr10QYOQgaUTYqk gDeWR0C5UMAFWWv5yJ58+g1Uq+Yz7+6DH+0F5d9XxiVNW8lixFUEM7oMCz22P9+EyHmI okECBnEAGzNOsEXqxU8IaTusKY2LFdoIYskpnQ5CzDngg6FEf5KsEKvUp5uHsGG4RqRq UEXoo7Uxk6PIWdaIw3b6H80ec7Sldau9YD5q5XMRJNGG7XUhVjvuAPuQ1P6+8eDv8xbB ohW21Ndv/EHZcWSSuIusL7njkL5bvoGEFmEQKNfXOrkdKQ5o5lNYU3pw0bX7k6DAWFX+ PB+w== 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 Received: by 10.236.144.134 with SMTP id n6mr5529492yhj.50.1331767304504; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 16:21:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.146.86.14 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 16:21:44 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20120314225117.GB12279@kroah.com> References: <20120314150827.53dc8336@googlemail.com> <20120314152209.GA2157@kroah.com> <4F60D585.4050206@gentoo.org> <4F60E9C1.7050600@gentoo.org> <20120314210456.GB11179@kroah.com> <20120314225117.GB12279@kroah.com> Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 23:21:44 +0000 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Let's redesign the entire filesystem! From: David Leverton To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Archives-Salt: e6033117-8794-4746-b287-4dfffa9a1d06 X-Archives-Hash: fc60d7e9c46cd02a3dbfa448e424d8c6 On 14 March 2012 22:51, Greg KH wrote: > Oh, that's simple, separate-/usr-without-initramfs will not work and > will not be supported :) See, it's this "we're doing it this way because we know best and we say so" that upsets people. I'm trying to encourage everyone to get to the core reasons for having a separate /usr in the first place (not all of which are guaranteed to be mentioned on any specific wiki page), and logically analyse the potential disadvantages of using an initramfs in each situation. It may turn out that there are no disadvantages after all, but the analysis is still important, not only to make sure that "we"'re making the right decision, but also to persuade everyone else that it's the right decision. > Again, the fact that it works for some people today is pure luck, and > odds are, it really isn't, but it's really hard to determine this given > that the init system they are using doesn't provide a good feedback loop > for this type of thing. Maybe it would be worth improving the init system to do so? Or maybe it wouldn't because using an initramfs is easier and has no drawbacks, but see above.