Re: [gentoo-user] /dev/sda* missing at boot

[Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com>]

On Thu, 8 Sep 2011 18:39:21 -0400
Canek Peláez Valdés <caneko@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 6:33 PM, Mick <michaelkintzios@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> > Unless I misunderstood this and referenced threads, all this agro
> > is being generated because udev devs decided to give primacy not to
> > the linux fs and prevailing FHS conventions, but their udev code
> > and what may have been an easy workaround for them?
> >
> > Given that I do not understand the ins and outs of udev, or the way
> > gentoo and upstream manage such proposals and ultimately accept
> > changes, why don't gentoo devs raise alternative options with the
> > Fedora dev or who ever had this idea upstream that udev code effort
> > is more precious than all the workarounds (initramfs,
> > repartitioning, etc.) that some of us have to go through?
> >
> > The alternatives I've read so far that advocate the avoidance of the
> > imposition of an initramfs or merging /usr into / for the sake of a
> > udev design choice, seem more 'intelligent' to me - in a gentoo
> > principle sort of way.
> >
> > On the other hand, for a binary distro the udev dev approach would
> > of course seem less disruptive and therefore our small gentoo user
> > base may need to shout really loud to be heard.
> >
> > Do we get to vote on this?
> 
> Not really: you can vote with your feet and use another
> distro/operating system. But the choice is theirs.
> 
> >  Can we make a difference other than venting here
> > and in the forums?
> 
> Yes: design and write a different system.

That's a really poor answer. You are offering two distasteful options
at either end of the spectrum when the real solution is plainly obvious
right in the middle:

Communicate to whichever devs are making the calls, explain the issue
caused by the proposed changes, open and entertain dialogue, let all
voices be heard and let sanity prevail.

You have consistently offered only two realistic options: their way or
the highway. This presumes that the devs involved are impervious to the
concept of dialogue at all, and cannot be contacted or swayed.

You see, none of that is true. There is *always* a third way and it is
almost always the best possible route to follow. 


-- 
Alan McKinnnon
alan.mckinnon@gmail.com