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 1R388L-0008Sb-Jd for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 15:09:17 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0BB3C21C15E; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 15:09:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.muc.de (colin.muc.de [193.149.48.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id C976621C147 for ; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 15:06:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 32478 invoked by uid 3782); 12 Sep 2011 15:06:37 -0000 Received: from acm.muc.de (pD955715E.dip.t-dialin.net [217.85.113.94]) by colin.muc.de (tmda-ofmipd) with ESMTP; Mon, 12 Sep 2011 17:06:35 +0200 Received: (qmail 3938 invoked by uid 1000); 12 Sep 2011 15:02:48 -0000 Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2011 15:02:48 +0000 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: [gentoo-user] udev + /usr Message-ID: <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-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Delivery-Agent: TMDA/1.1.12 (Macallan) From: Alan Mackenzie X-Primary-Address: acm@muc.de X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 8058870a76b89759da10b6abdd568951 Hi, everybody. Hope nobody minds me starting a new thread with an accurate name. Which version of udev is it that has this nauseating feature of needing /usr loaded to boot? Somewhere in that version's source will be several (or lots of) "/usr". Just how difficult is it going to be to replace "/usr/bin" with "/bin" throughout the source? udev is part of the kernel. How come the kernel hackers aren't up in arms about this as much as we are? Or are they, maybe? In which case, maybe the kernel people would welcome an option to disrequire the early mounting of /usr as much as we would. Anyhow, I'd like to take a peek at the source code which does this evil thing. Would somebody please tell me which version of udev is involved. Thanks. -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).