From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 20A5B1381F3 for ; Sat, 28 Sep 2013 18:11:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DD097E0C6F; Sat, 28 Sep 2013 18:11:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-bk0-f42.google.com (mail-bk0-f42.google.com [209.85.214.42]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id A4212E0B03 for ; Sat, 28 Sep 2013 18:11:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-bk0-f42.google.com with SMTP id my10so1466589bkb.29 for ; Sat, 28 Sep 2013 11:11:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=YVPLYrWdhqrP/EfuVjZmukoTj1zjqXVPwVkBBOUnsqg=; b=LtkpBR5/fwTGQGG1N2Hr+SPO7xflNNjbLwexDuwUrBIEYh+Ook5Il3nxy7KM4+M229 afBzXiHFS/5vRabKi96RkZJNKAkbRx+C3gFTBckm6VetJaEx4Ux5mLWPXadZlyy/dSeU tj0++JEfgFKGH/W9CSmkmNjHxaj9vvnHyFmCL/XUkblSxUVa5EPCaTpTB8OY7TRllnYP JzqxIzmBdnnpjmlm0IgeYSg66R1EwR2wsujIKuXSlAtuZOUtKm6kANj2SUCt0fI4cxwi jhBnNU0OIqiyoeqa3iALGAI5N17403Oa7hsTnrM/zoVfgP81WhHunpPRRPVvXHWShg6j 3E/A== X-Received: by 10.205.15.72 with SMTP id pt8mr11370321bkb.17.1380391868148; Sat, 28 Sep 2013 11:11:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.178.21] (p57B54843.dip0.t-ipconnect.de. [87.181.72.67]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id w9sm7391431bkn.12.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 28 Sep 2013 11:11:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <52471BBA.1030600@googlemail.com> Date: Sat, 28 Sep 2013 20:11:06 +0200 From: Volker Armin Hemmann User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0 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 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] separate / and /usr to require initramfs 2013-11-01 References: <20130927222109.GD23408@server> <5246079E.7090406@gmail.com> <20130927223916.GE23408@server> <52460D42.2080109@gmail.com> <52461056.9020604@gmail.com> <5246BE35.3010408@libertytrek.org> <5246E1F5.9050302@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <5246E1F5.9050302@gmail.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 0d74b055-d355-41f4-bca2-ae34c75308f3 X-Archives-Hash: bf2cda908b0e47f5ac885d474e883c6a Am 28.09.2013 16:04, schrieb Alan McKinnon: > On 28/09/2013 13:32, Tanstaafl wrote: >> On 2013-09-27 7:10 PM, Alan McKinnon wrote: >>> No really,*why exactly*? >> Because that was the RECOMMENDED WAY IN THE GENTOO HANDBOOK when I first >> set this system up many years ago. > This was something almost all of us recommended way back then. Lord only > knows why we recommeded that. I never knew. Something about 'saver as..' or something stupid. > Maybe it was small drives (which didn't > have), maybe it was different mount options (which I never did and never > saw anyone else do either), or maybe it was for thin clients (which I > only ever saw in use once - Shuttleworth labs in University of Cape Town). > > So why did we all (and I included myself) recommend this so much? Dude, > I have no idea, but I *think* we were cargo-culting more than any other > single factor. > > >> I have no philosophical reason reason to stick with it, only a (maybe >> irrational) fear of breaking things if I attempt to merge it back into /. >> >> This, combined with an intense (also maybe irrational) desire to avoid >> like the plague using an initramfs, is why this decision to FORCE me >> into a position of possibly having to break my system (either by a filed >> attempt at merging /usr into /, or a failed attampt at using an initramfs). > No-one is forcing you to do anything, the news item did not say that. > > It says that if you do it, the devs will not support you and you are on > your own. It also says that in the dev's opinion, the day when you can > no longer support it either is probably not too far away > >> I too sincerely hope eudev bypasses this issue. > This has nothing to do with eudev, not with udev > >> The main thing about this that pisses me off is the lack of enough >> warning... one month? Really? One month to compleyelt rebuild a seerver >> that has been running flawlessly for many years, just because someone >> doesn't like something that has been done for many years? > > First, it is not one month, it is much longer. We've all been whinging > about the issue for most of this year. Two, why do you think you need to > rebuild the entire machine? You don't need to do that just to merge two > filesystems. > > To merge two filesystems, you just merge two filesystems. You don't > rebuild anything. You might have some downtime though one reboot. You cp everything into /newuser. On shutdown you unmount /usr, mv newuser usr, sync, unmount, reboot. if you want to do it 'old fashioned', you cp everything to /newuser, reboot with systemrescuecd, mount / on /mnt/gentoo, my newuser to usr and reboot. Oh, and change fstab. Simple and boring.