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 1R1bbS-0003c2-Cw for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 08 Sep 2011 10:13:02 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D626C21C15D; Thu, 8 Sep 2011 10:12:53 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ew0-f53.google.com (mail-ew0-f53.google.com [209.85.215.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id AFCCD21C033 for ; Thu, 8 Sep 2011 10:11:58 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ewy8 with SMTP id 8so240862ewy.40 for ; Thu, 08 Sep 2011 03:11:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer :mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=NlWrmkkxPbEMyxwo/jGn265E0AqG6bE2ftCLCOqquzM=; b=qnHArcIvC9RCO/UZWEPL/8l8IJXkjSJ0EwYXu+RcUXd5XJNK49bKv09J2tLymPfdxj 4ffACO+yYLrKXVUE9G5jWrvGAN04yLS+6/p27vFhc0D/JkjEj0peKonTWfGAbFs7FybX mEwMnL+CHO/1KxemuqOSijVS5R1d6ou+fjykA= Received: by 10.14.10.70 with SMTP id 46mr149015eeu.223.1315476717896; Thu, 08 Sep 2011 03:11:57 -0700 (PDT) Received: from rohan (dustpuppy.is.co.za [196.14.169.11]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id b3sm5830374eec.7.2011.09.08.03.11.54 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 08 Sep 2011 03:11:55 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 8 Sep 2011 12:11:51 +0200 From: Alan McKinnon To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] /dev/sda* missing at boot Message-ID: <20110908121151.018c38f3@rohan> In-Reply-To: References: <201108191109.34984.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> <20110907050952.GA2588@linux1> <4E66FFFA.2020600@gmail.com> <201109071923.39954.Dan.Johansson@dmj.nu> <20110907235457.691be720@zaphod.digimed.co.uk> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.8 (GTK+ 2.24.4; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) 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-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 90554e0684d75fce91d0e4286a6d2741 On Wed, 7 Sep 2011 23:23:45 -0400 Canek Pel=C3=A1ez Vald=C3=A9s wrote: > > I wound up being able to recover by doing a full reinstall of all > > packages on the live system after mounting /usr into a > > freshly-mkfs'd new lvm volume. If I'd taken the system offline, it > > would have been much more difficult. =20 >=20 > You can always remount / in another LVM module. Really, what's so > especial about /usr? Don't get me started. Oh, wait, you just did. Right, here goes: An initramfs is optional becuase i can disable it in the kernel. I would like to keep that optional. FHS says I can have /usr on a separate partition and I would like to keep that because it is a good idea. FHS says I can mount /usr read-only if I choose, which is also a good idea. On a shared jumphost with 570 concurrent users it's actually a VERY GOOD ODEA and I'd rather not lose that facility thankyouverymuch. I do not need, want nor can I find a valid reason to *require* an initramfs. Systems boot just fine without them. FHS says I can have the minimal software and tools to effect a system repair on / and put then entirety of user-space on /usr. Everything involved in this thread runs early in the boot process and I fail to find a single convincing reason why /usr is involved at all. Anything required at this point can simply be put into /bin, /sbin and /lib{,64} which one will note is exactly how we have been doing it all along. This whole mess has every indication of a singular maintainer who cannot be bothered taking other people's needs into account and foisting off his own personal preferences onto an entire ecosystem. I think such people should take note of how Torvalds works and emulate him as opposed to emulating say Drepper as a role-model for good project mantainership practice. --=20 Alan McKinnnon alan.mckinnon@gmail.com