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 1S7r5i-0008Qj-8C for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 16:30:22 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 92088E09C9; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 16:30:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: from svr-us4.tirtonadi.com (svr-us4.tirtonadi.com [69.65.43.212]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7AC4FE0963 for ; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 16:28:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-vx0-f181.google.com ([209.85.220.181]) by svr-us4.tirtonadi.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:RC4-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1S7r3x-003fgD-O7 for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 23:28:33 +0700 Received: by vcge1 with SMTP id e1so2500663vcg.40 for ; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 09:28:28 -0700 (PDT) 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 Received: by 10.52.17.82 with SMTP id m18mr2315241vdd.89.1331742508380; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 09:28:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.58.200 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 09:28:28 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.220.58.200 with HTTP; Wed, 14 Mar 2012 09:28:28 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <07ed01cd01fd$ea6c6b60$bf454220$@kutulu.org> References: <4F5AC0F6.6000804@gmail.com> <4F5B33CA.2020705@coolmail.se> <20120310153540.5194cd7c@digimed.co.uk> <4F5BBE7A.8040802@coolmail.se> <4F5C724C.1010708@coolmail.se> <292166434.606817.1331577566543.JavaMail.open-xchange@email.1and1.com> <4F5E853F.8060404@gmail.com> <017301cd00bd$24bce2f0$6e36a8d0$@kutulu.org> <20120313091356.5a947032@khamul.example.com> <07ed01cd01fd$ea6c6b60$bf454220$@kutulu.org> Date: Wed, 14 Mar 2012 23:28:28 +0700 Message-ID: Subject: RE: [gentoo-user] Re: LVM, /usr and really really bad thoughts. From: Pandu Poluan To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec50405d624f27504bb3677e4 X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - svr-us4.tirtonadi.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - lists.gentoo.org X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - poluan.info X-Archives-Salt: ef19966f-01fa-4235-9dbf-9cf6695cd440 X-Archives-Hash: 597ce0d533ad256a153cfc8543016554 --bcaec50405d624f27504bb3677e4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 On Mar 14, 2012 11:19 PM, "Mike Edenfield" wrote: > > > From: Alan McKinnon [mailto:alan.mckinnon@gmail.com] > > Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 3:14 AM > > To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org > > Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: LVM, /usr and really really bad thoughts. > > > > On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 11:54:58 +0700 > > Pandu Poluan wrote: > > > > > > The idea of trying to launch udevd and initialize devices without > > > > the software, installed in /usr, which is required by those devices > > > > is a configuration that causes problems in many real-world, > > > > practical situations. > > > > > > > > The requirement of having /usr on the same partition as / is also a > > > > configuration that causes problems in many real-world, practical > > > > situations. > > > > > > > > > > I quite often read about this, and after some thinking, I have to > > > ask: why? > > > > > > > I've also thought about this and I also want to ask why? > > To be honest, I was simply taking for granted that all of the other people > on this list who made a huge fuss about this were not lying. > > I, personally, have never had a use or need for a separate /usr; I know how > big (approximately) /usr is going to get and I give it that much space. I > guess I'm fortunate not to have ever managed a server where the hard drives > were so tiny as to make that impractical. > > This whole udev/initrd/mdev/etc problem, for me, has been little more than > an entertaining diversion, since I've been using a supported setup from the > start. However, I'm confident that there are legitimate reasons why some > sysadmins use certain configurations which require / and /usr to be > different partitions; I'm less confident that initrd is not the real > solution to their "problem" but that's not really my call to make. > > I'm *very* confident that a dismissal of this issue as "the ego if one or > two guys who happen to write udev" is a blatant oversimplification that does > not do justice to the complexities involved in making modern hardware work. > This email [1] (and the correction email right afterwards) should give some much-needed perspective on why we're driving full-speed toward an overturned manure truck (which some of us, e.g., Walter and me, are desperately pulling at the handbrakes). [1] http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/2011-September/076713.html Rgds, --bcaec50405d624f27504bb3677e4 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


On Mar 14, 2012 11:19 PM, "Mike Edenfield" <kutulu@kutulu.org> wrote:
>
> > From: Alan McKinnon [mailto:alan.mckinnon@gmail.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, March 13, 2012 3:14 AM
> > To: gentoo-user@l= ists.gentoo.org
> > Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: LVM, /usr and really really bad th= oughts.
> >
> > On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 11:54:58 +0700
> > Pandu Poluan <pandu@polua= n.info> wrote:
> >
> > > > The idea of trying to launch udevd and initialize devic= es without
> > > > the software, installed in /usr, which is required by t= hose devices
> > > > is a configuration that causes problems in many real-wo= rld,
> > > > practical situations.
> > > >
> > > > The requirement of having /usr on the same partition as= / is also a
> > > > configuration that causes problems in many real-world, = practical
> > > > situations.
> > > >
> > >
> > > I quite often read about this, and after some thinking, I ha= ve to
> > > ask: why?
> > >
> >
> > I've also thought about this and I also want to ask why?
>
> To be honest, I was simply taking for granted that all of the other pe= ople
> on this list who made a huge fuss about this were not lying.
>
> I, personally, have never had a use or need for a separate /usr; I kno= w how
> big (approximately) /usr is going to get and I give it that much space= . I
> guess I'm fortunate not to have ever managed a server where the ha= rd drives
> were so =C2=A0tiny as to make that impractical.
>
> This whole udev/initrd/mdev/etc problem, for me, has been little more = than
> an entertaining diversion, since I've been using a supported setup= from the
> start. However, I'm confident that there are legitimate reasons wh= y some
> sysadmins use certain configurations which require / and /usr to be > different partitions; I'm less confident that initrd is not the re= al
> solution to their "problem" but that's not really my cal= l to make.
>
> I'm *very* confident that a dismissal of this issue as "the e= go if one or
> two guys who happen to write udev" is a blatant oversimplificatio= n that does
> not do justice to the complexities involved in making modern hardware = work.
>

This email [1] (and the correction email right afterwards) should give s= ome much-needed perspective on why we're driving full-speed toward an o= verturned manure truck (which some of us, e.g., Walter and me, are desperat= ely pulling at the handbrakes).

[1] http://lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/2011-September/076= 713.html

Rgds,

--bcaec50405d624f27504bb3677e4--