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 1R4JSY-00056c-19 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 15 Sep 2011 21:27:02 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 9273F21C308; Thu, 15 Sep 2011 21:26:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtpq4.gn.mail.iss.as9143.net (smtpq4.gn.mail.iss.as9143.net [212.54.34.167]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9923C21C18F for ; Thu, 15 Sep 2011 21:25:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [212.54.34.151] (helo=smtp19.gn.mail.iss.as9143.net) by smtpq4.gn.mail.iss.as9143.net with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R4JQp-0004IM-2C for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Thu, 15 Sep 2011 23:25:15 +0200 Received: from 5ed027a1.cm-7-1a.dynamic.ziggo.nl ([94.208.39.161] helo=data.antarean.org) by smtp19.gn.mail.iss.as9143.net with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R4JQo-0005Y1-4Y for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Thu, 15 Sep 2011 23:25:14 +0200 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by data.antarean.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 528DBDAB for ; Thu, 15 Sep 2011 23:25:26 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at antarean.org Received: from data.antarean.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (data.antarean.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id V9NgtdxFQkNL for ; Thu, 15 Sep 2011 23:25:24 +0200 (CEST) Received: from eve.localnet (eve.lan.antarean.org [10.20.13.50]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by data.antarean.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 7D84A635 for ; Thu, 15 Sep 2011 23:25:24 +0200 (CEST) From: Joost Roeleveld To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] udev + /usr Date: Thu, 15 Sep 2011 23:25:11 +0200 Message-ID: <1879248.cfd3ZtivOU@eve> User-Agent: KMail/4.7.1 (Linux/2.6.36-gentoo-r5; KDE/4.7.1; x86_64; ; ) In-Reply-To: References: <20110912150248.GB3599@acm.acm> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-Information: Please contact the ISP for more information X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-ID: 1R4JQo-0005Y1-4Y X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-SpamCheck: geen spam, SpamAssassin (niet cached, score=-0.692, vereist 5, BAYES_00 -1.90, KHOP_DYNAMIC 0.73, RDNS_DYNAMIC 0.98, RP_MATCHES_RCVD -0.50) X-ZiggoSMTP-MailScanner-From: joost@antarean.org X-Spam-Status: No X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: b0faa363e4fe6fa6670aad0e20108a7f On Thursday, September 15, 2011 01:43:17 PM Canek Pel=C3=A1ez Vald=C3=A9= s wrote: > On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 10:58 AM, Canek Pel=C3=A1ez Vald=C3=A9s =20 wrote: > (This mail is to keep the guys un -user in the loop about -devel). >=20 > OK, so Joost posted his proposal to -dev: The thread on gentoo-dev is not yet finished and I intend to try to get= some=20 more information. As I mentioned in my other email. > I would also like to point you guys to this article in LWN.net: >=20 > http://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/458789/3ae00c9827889929/ >=20 > The article (the second part about systemd) closes with: >=20 > =E2=80=9CThe overall picture was of a project that is on a roll, gain= ing > features and users at a fast rate. The Systemd view of the world has > not yet won over everybody, but the opposition seems to be fading. > Systemd looks like the init system of the future (and more) for a lot= > of high-profile distributions.=E2=80=9D >=20 > The article was written by Jonathan Corbet, editor of LWN and (I thin= k > most people would agree with me) someone who has always tried to be > objective and impartial. I'll read this later (probably tomorrow) and get back to you on this if= =20 necessary. > So, if Joost and others are willing and able to implement the > necessary bits to avoid the need for an initramfs, I salute them and > wish them luck. But the most probable outcome is this: >=20 > * The fork/replacement will take years of man-effort: design, > implementation, debug, documentation, mainteinance. > * At the same time, the dev-approved solution of a minimal initramfs > or a dracut/genkernel generated one will be available and working. > * If the forking/replacement team manages to create a workable > fork/replacement, it will have to sell it to the Gentoo devs, and if > the initramfs solution is working properly the most rational answer > will be "no, thank you". The time needed for this is not certain as we are planning on basing it= on the=20 current udev and see what is possible. If the Gentoo-devs come up with a fool-proof solution, which is one of = the=20 possible outcomes I am trying to get to in the gentoo-dev thread, I wil= l be=20 happy there as well. As for the udev-fork to ever becoming mainstream, I can't say. It might= not=20 even work the way we are hoping. Only time will tell. > I'm sorry if my analysis bother some people, but it's basically what > I've been saying from the beginning. I'm glad Joost asked the > developers for their input. I think it clears the air about a lot of > things. I have no problem with your analysis and yes, the initial response from= Zac=20 was what you've been saying. I am hoping to get more information on this and I will have no problem = if you=20 keep reporting it back here. One of the reasons I asked it on Gentoo-dev is simply because I agree w= ith=20 some people here that this thread was starting to go in circles and no = new=20 information was being added. -- Joost