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 6BE3E59CAF for ; Sat, 9 Apr 2016 12:27:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A7ABC21C0F4; Sat, 9 Apr 2016 12:27:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ABE8D21C078 for ; Sat, 9 Apr 2016 12:27:36 +0000 (UTC) Received: from eris.local (dynamic-adsl-84-220-77-7.clienti.tiscali.it [84.220.77.7]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: lu_zero) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7C07E340BCF for ; Sat, 9 Apr 2016 12:27:35 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] usr merge To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <570312c8.1469ca0a.30985.5db1@mx.google.com> From: Luca Barbato Message-ID: Date: Sat, 9 Apr 2016 14:27:31 +0200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.0 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 In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 7485f818-ecc0-4327-bbe4-e9a47393a59d X-Archives-Hash: a2a24ba60c35eaa176e412a91db77909 On 09/04/16 13:53, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 7:41 AM, Luca Barbato wrote: >> On 05/04/16 03:19, William Hubbs wrote: >>> Thoughts on any of this? >> >> The whole usr-merge moves the problem of putting stuff in / to putting >> the very same stuff in the initrd when something different from busybox >> (or equivalent) is needed to get the early boot mounting. >> >> Do we have a reliable way to address this now? >> > > Put the very same stuff in the initramfs? Most initramfs creation > scripts should already do this automatically, and with compat symlinks > even those that don't probably will still end up doing it anyway.. The question is different: do they work reliably? usr-merge does not solve any problem in itself (and it is totally backwards, if somebody wants to simplify would do /usr -> /), but makes more evident that you might need lots of the userspace to successfully complete your early boot. lu