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 C29941381F3 for ; Sun, 29 Sep 2013 19:34:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B3266E0EF0; Sun, 29 Sep 2013 19:34:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-lb0-f178.google.com (mail-lb0-f178.google.com [209.85.217.178]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 94752E0E21 for ; Sun, 29 Sep 2013 19:34:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-lb0-f178.google.com with SMTP id z5so3749755lbh.23 for ; Sun, 29 Sep 2013 12:34:21 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=qZj9Xe5b1xNdUK3vEPxkMkvrR2/I9cEdg2fHBqMvMbE=; b=ULdKopX3VffXt6z1YE8gB110+XyvfpHTQUrgJQebzu43sueB0WdSktLtKJx6mTxkoc gKqNxAQHG20BsWIPnAWJpeWDhfAHtm2mcVfl3lHi8RFZHkBEbz/ECbLoUvE8mrtd1ruu qM8SfYRjm49CUBGh8wRw00BtUZJnWsMyMMA1PZrp8LvFwHfAZY3CKLm1gwo5Re33ZsjQ 156SX+NZXRxaWdFYwgjKliPjL87t4kzf15TjYJ/PrBrQOVUtDaWNcu/Zc7rnBRa4QLyq /TWiulUPXZ/2AX00ckUz3DteN3Csq81dhBxaA9lNTzbdNNNtC1DG+sZqCDYTLpu4Ti8C WIbQ== 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 X-Received: by 10.152.120.99 with SMTP id lb3mr2917639lab.31.1380483261750; Sun, 29 Sep 2013 12:34:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.114.96.2 with HTTP; Sun, 29 Sep 2013 12:34:21 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20130929191128.GB16543@linux1> References: <20130927222109.GD23408@server> <5246079E.7090406@gmail.com> <20130927223916.GE23408@server> <52460D42.2080109@gmail.com> <20130928003220.GF23408@server> <20130928160159.GA4247@linux1> <20130928190441.GB11317@acm.acm> <20130928211702.46eda062@digimed.co.uk> <52486A5D.1020402@libertytrek.org> <20130929191128.GB16543@linux1> Date: Sun, 29 Sep 2013 14:34:21 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] separate / and /usr to require initramfs 2013-11-01 From: =?UTF-8?B?Q2FuZWsgUGVsw6FleiBWYWxkw6lz?= To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 143b66f2-ba58-446b-bc96-260d544c5703 X-Archives-Hash: db8b0b57bb7b2ed0899c7d72f985c22c On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 2:11 PM, William Hubbs wrote: > On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 01:21:30PM -0500, Canek Pel=C3=A1ez Vald=C3=A9s w= rote: >> On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Tanstaafl = wrote: >> > On 2013-09-28 4:17 PM, Neil Bothwick wrote: >> >> >> >> On Sat, 28 Sep 2013 19:04:41 +0000, Alan Mackenzie wrote: >> >> >> >>>> I suppose that what I am about to say isn't really relevant, but it= is >> >>>> unfortunate over the past year that people blamed udev specifically >> >>>> for this. It is true that it does things that don't work if /usr is= n't >> >>>> mounted, but eudev does as well, since it is basically the same cod= e. >> >>> >> >>> >> >>> Who else is there to blame? We are continually being told that a >> >>> separate /usr is "broken", as though this were some unfortunate act = of >> >>> , much like an earthquake. This gets >> >>> patronising really quickly. (Please note, I'm NOT blaming you here.= I >> >>> appreciate that you're as much victim as Dale or me or anyone else >> >>> round here.) >> >> >> >> >> >> It's evolution. Linux has for years been moving in this direction, no= w it >> >> has reached the point where the Gentoo devs can no longer devote the >> >> increasing time needed to support what has now become an dge case. >> > >> > >> > So the solution is to give users one MONTH to prepare? Why not 6 month= s, or >> > better, a year? What for gods sake is the rush??? >> > >> > Where are the links/pointers to the INTERNAL discussions of this decis= ion? I >> > seriously want to know. If gentoo devs are not willing to provide a 'p= aper >> > trail' for how this decision was arrived at, and let others judge thei= r >> > decisions based on the merits of their arguments, then what does that = say >> > about their true motivations/intentions? >> >> The discussion happened in [1], [2], and [3]. And in similar meetings >> and mailing lists since months ago. >> >> [1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.project/2946 >> [2] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20130924.txt >> [3] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/88282 > > You forgot [4]. > > [4] http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/gentoo/dev/235575 > > I was actually against it initially. After reading and understanding > where the linux ecosystem is going, my position evolved to support it. Thanks for the link, William, and for all the work you have done to bring Gentoo to modern standards. Regards. --=20 Canek Pel=C3=A1ez Vald=C3=A9s Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingenier=C3=ADa de la Computaci=C3=B3n Universidad Nacional Aut=C3=B3noma de M=C3=A9xico