From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-user+bounces-151039-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 69A421381F3
for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Sun, 29 Sep 2013 15:12:48 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id ED908E0E72;
Sun, 29 Sep 2013 15:12:38 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-gg0-f170.google.com (mail-gg0-f170.google.com [209.85.161.170])
(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CC528E0E1F
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 29 Sep 2013 15:12:37 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-gg0-f170.google.com with SMTP id f4so316646ggn.15
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Sun, 29 Sep 2013 08:12:37 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references
:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=TApvEC2WMUB+74etZMNJ5As0LyDlE0sHcoA3CsiNy3E=;
b=qWwtn4DlVsazKgS9iGK5KNkKYRXSft/N9hOGzpPa9zPkbn8G1DR0bs/STlfeRXn1EU
56XaFg8Ih8Pa66SSL8G7jNMreWiJndglcQ90JnUqLxqw2ODRd9TeNJCiBt8G/TpfpafP
SwwDIH9n1zX4IBA9O3umOqxxgcAgm6SeFRV2hnICoBlHzi0dTM2IC+J24xOvFg24ieQC
pk5ii508QenzXDMMGSpdiN4H877V+Mb0VMZ+2r511Sx4RFBvaWk/VpGL8ZPtRK4f54IQ
zXWMlb6Er77/IbTRFHCtQGhvxoyh8V5bCHu6xE9L9/WL6+C0g+0It2A0+kgYTsyb2i4r
yhLg==
X-Received: by 10.236.134.8 with SMTP id r8mr1043074yhi.62.1380467556965;
Sun, 29 Sep 2013 08:12:36 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from onyx.private ([50.124.179.76])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id s20sm27517722yhi.0.1969.12.31.16.00.00
(version=TLSv1 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
Sun, 29 Sep 2013 08:12:36 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <52484363.7020309@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2013 11:12:35 -0400
From: Greg Woodbury <redwolfe@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130805 Thunderbird/17.0.8
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
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: Flexibility and robustness in the Linux organisim (was: [gentoo-user]
separate / and /usr to require initramfs 2013-11-01)
References: <5246079E.7090406@gmail.com> <524761B4.60805@gmail.com> <20130929052937.GA30380@waltdnes.org> <201309290925.06893.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> <5247E4C2.5040502@gmail.com> <52480720.7070704@googlemail.com> <52480902.9040305@gmail.com> <52481602.6020305@googlemail.com>
In-Reply-To: <52481602.6020305@googlemail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Archives-Salt: f5df9704-5060-4d07-ac66-bf861c3e80b6
X-Archives-Hash: 6262ee6cd08458dec1ee775e6141c9ff
On 09/29/2013 07:58 AM, Volker Armin Hemmann wrote:
> things were broken way before that. As much as I hate systemd, it is not
> the root cause of the problem.
>
> The problems were caused by people saying that seperate /usr was a good
> idea, so / would not fill up and similar idiocies. The problems were
> caused by people saying that lvm is a good idea - for desktops. Those
> people who are fighting against the kernel auto assembling raids are to
> blame too.
>
> Systemd is just another point in a very long list.
>
The usr filesystem was separate from root from the very early days of
UNIX. Disks were *tiny* (compared to today) and spreading certain
things across separate spindles provided major benefits. Certainly, the
original need to require a separate usr went away fairly quickly, but
other benefits continued to encourage a seperation between root and usr.
The var filesystem was for variable system data, and was never terribly
big and its inclusion on the root volume happened. The home filesystem
became traditionally separate because data expands to fill all
availab;e space, and users collect *things*
Networking made it possible to have home entirely off system, and
diskless worstations ruled for a while as well.
By the time Linux came along, it had become common for boot volumes to
not be mounted during normal system operation, but the three filesystem
layout was common and workable. As Linux continued to be like Topsy
(she jest growed!) fragmentation started to occur as "distributions"
arose. The "balkanization" of Linux distributions became a real concern
to some and standardization offorts were encouraged.
The "File System Standard" (FSS) was renamed to the Filesystem Hierarch
Standard (FHS) and it was strongly based on the UNIX System V
definitions (which called for seperation of usr and root.) POSIX added
more layers and attempted to bring in the various BSD flavors.
THe LSB (Linux Standards Base) effort was conceived as supersceeding all
the other efforts, and FHS was folded into the LSB definition. Yet even
then a separate root and usr distinction survived. Then things started
falling apart again - POSIX rose like a phoenix and even the
Windows/wintel environment could claim POSIX compliant behavior. The
fall of the LSB effort really became evident when the FHS was gutted and
certain major players decided to ignore the LSB recommendations.
(Look out, there are some severely mixed metaphors coming and perhaps
even some "allegory" Bear with it and you should get the gist of my
accusations.)
And now we are here. There is no clear definition of what comprises
this OS that is a Linux kernel and a largely GNU based user-land. There
are two major X-Windows based "Desktop Environments" and many less major
DEs and Linux is seen as being "locked in a struggle" with the Microsoft
OSs to "win the hearts and minds of the Users."
This is quite scary to many folks who depend on the success of Linux
"winning" the so-called war. One of the camps bent on wining the "war"
is GNOME. Despite much history and experience that shows that choice
and freedom are NOT disadvantages, the mainline GNOME folks have charged
ahead on their own in a direction that overrides user choice and seems
bound and determined to "outdo" Microsoft at their own game.
As a result, the GNOME Alliance has shattered. The main GNOME army
marches on its unfathomable path, and various large chunks have broke
off in their own directions (e.g. Cinnamon and Mate) seeking to remain
flexible and not incompatible with the KDE and other lesser DE folks.
It is truly layable at the feet of the GNOME folks, the breakage of the
root and usr filesystem separability is all derived from the GNOME camp.
These changes may not, in fact, be deliberate or intended to "defeat"
Microsoft, but Ockham's Razor cuts and intentionality is the simpler
explanation.
I am NOT happy with the situation as it stands. Efforts that I have
made on behalf of the FOSS and Linux/GNU are no longer serving to
benefit me and the others with whom I thought I shared aspirations.
I am an OS Agnostic/Atheist. I use what works to do what I need to do.
My at-home network includes all four (or is that 3.5?) "consumer" OSes.
I have spent quite a bit of effort to have them all work together, but
forces seem to be in play that seem determined to "win at all costs" and
enforce a computing monoculture. Such a result is not a good thing. As
with biological systems, monocultures are more vulnerable to
interference and disease. The evolution of differentiated organ systems
in more complex (or "higher") forms of life is driven by the need to
provide robustness and continued operation in the face of unknown
challenges.
To come back to the thesis: robustness and flexibility are required for
good "health" and we are witnessing a dangerous challenge.
[PS} If anybody cares, I was trained in both Computer Science and
Biological Science. and I can expand on the parallels if so desired.
--
G.Wolfe Woodbury
redwolfe@gmail.com