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 1R4Pf5-0000r3-K0 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 04:04:23 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 43D0721C086; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 04:04:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 377AC21C04E for ; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 04:03:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BFC0C1B401B for ; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 04:03:31 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -4.646 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.646 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=1.953, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id u3h754irSRdB for ; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 04:03:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id D677D1B4001 for ; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 04:03:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R4Pe3-0005TC-GV for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 06:03:19 +0200 Received: from ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.231.22.224]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 06:03:19 +0200 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Fri, 16 Sep 2011 06:03:19 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: udev and /usr Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 04:03:06 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <1740055.XA9oyAS8HQ@eve> <4E7252A1.2000300@gentoo.org> <1336457.yNbGUQDlCr@eve> 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 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: Pan/0.135 (Tomorrow I'll Wake Up and Scald Myself with Tea; GIT 8ea89e0 branch-master) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: d0641b123b861beaa21e3e90aaf2a243 Joost Roeleveld posted on Thu, 15 Sep 2011 22:33:18 +0200 as excerpted: > On Thursday, September 15, 2011 09:31:45 PM Luca Barbato wrote: >> On 15/09/2011 16:33, Joost Roeleveld wrote: >> >=20 >> > Not sure if you are aware of the discussions on the gentoo-user list >> > about the upcoming change where systemd and udev require /usr to be >> > available prior to starting of udev. >>=20 >> systemd seems more and more just a support burden for no gain... >=20 > Myself and a lot of others on the gentoo-user list agree with this. > Especially as there are plenty of installations where udev works withou= t > /usr mounted. As a kde user[1] I tend to agree, but I'm increasingly seeing talk on the= =20 gnome side of the "Gnome OS", to include pulse-audio, systemd, policykit,= =20 udev/u* (thus forcing lvm as well, at least lvm installation tho nothing=20 forces one to use it... yet, since lvm is required for udisks), etc. Legitimate question, primarily for the gentoo/gnome folks I guess. I=20 simply don't know how it's to work but am honestly rather fearful for the= =20 traditional Gentoo policy of letting the local sysadmin decide such=20 things: How serious is this talk, how integrated are they actually talking, and=20 what are the implications for Gentoo's Gnome users? Is gnome 3.5 or 4.0=20 or whatever going to require pulse-audio and systemd, on ANY=20 distribution, even Gentoo? If not, how much hacking is going to be=20 required by the gentoo/gnome folks to keep those sorts of choices for=20 Gentoo users? Will gentoo simply drop gnome as an option if it forces=20 the issue, or ??? It may be that this is already sorted on the gnome side, or that all this= =20 talk of gnome-os is simply hot-air, but like I said, I'm a kde user, so I= =20 wouldn't know, tho I'm concerned about its implications for the rest of=20 us (including kde, since it might well end up with similar=20 requirements). And I've not yet seen it mentioned in the gentoo=20 implications context, so I'm compelled to ask. --- [1] Tho the kde side seems headed the same direction, but at a somewhat=20 slower pace and with a bit more of a reputation for at least /some/=20 respect of user choice, so I expect the issue to come up first and worst=20 with gnome, and gentoo/kde to be able to follow the precedent, to some=20 degree. --=20 Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman