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 <gentoo-user+bounces-129770-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
id 1RF09d-0002iq-U7
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 15 Oct 2011 09:03:43 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4A90821C15E;
Sat, 15 Oct 2011 09:03:28 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-wy0-f181.google.com (mail-wy0-f181.google.com [74.125.82.181])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id A9D1121C150
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 15 Oct 2011 09:02:15 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by wyf19 with SMTP id 19so4525491wyf.40
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 15 Oct 2011 02:02:15 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=RapBLtmhldkxxDLZ0skgcIIxH09gvZqT7cXm51TMMuw=;
b=grHFm6ptfJaUw5WqCPJBbdmLLL80pK4+7qIS4zRTntD8DmJThlH5ZREZPjPAj/p50T
bHpWUXsbWKC3zqDgMGgEZ5eJEMrpneeq6xWIhCvHbn3sCPQ3M7DcQwhvt/7wwmbOBu1d
LD7xHznNglS8nhjk67uL2EXLsroCXClD+EACQ=
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
Received: by 10.216.133.219 with SMTP id q69mr3869952wei.79.1318669333757;
Sat, 15 Oct 2011 02:02:13 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.216.234.130 with HTTP; Sat, 15 Oct 2011 02:02:13 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <4E994657.2030200@gmail.com>
References: <tencent_37F5F8956D61083C1D2D5307@qq.com>
<CA+czFiCjniDmnt3mRs-ctp4tb6VZm6=TmexH6j1tLgQhO5ZPpA@mail.gmail.com>
<4E98601C.3030607@gmail.com>
<20111014224110.7acaf5b3@digimed.co.uk>
<4E98BBE4.6040306@gmail.com>
<CAA2qdGW6xn9c=O4uJZqLPwZE0V72FuJbSAHh2HZHm+MtMuVrkA@mail.gmail.com>
<4E992E82.5010103@gmail.com>
<CADPrc83X8ewGevW6-1zzowC01=jHfq_zZ3LSp0LAphyp4gzQNg@mail.gmail.com>
<4E994657.2030200@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 15 Oct 2011 02:02:13 -0700
Message-ID: <CADPrc83__x3XKOWQnXo4KiDFS3DENbWsUFtnsV9RHk04QV5HdQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Apologize to everyone for my nonprofessional
From: =?UTF-8?B?Q2FuZWsgUGVsw6FleiBWYWxkw6lz?= <caneko@gmail.com>
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Archives-Salt:
X-Archives-Hash: 039acb77d26ec1a1ca7e32846eb41c95
On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 1:37 AM, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
> Canek Pel=C3=A1ez Vald=C3=A9s wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 14, 2011 at 11:56 PM, Dale<rdalek1967@gmail.com> =C2=A0wrote=
:
>>>
>>> Pandu Poluan wrote:
>>>
>>> On Oct 15, 2011 5:49 AM, "Dale"<rdalek1967@gmail.com> =C2=A0wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Neil Bothwick wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> On Fri, 14 Oct 2011 11:15:24 -0500, Dale wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> A'right now. =C2=A0I'm going to start on hal and /usr being on / aga=
in.
>>>>>> =C2=A0:-P
>>>>>
>>>>> Jeez, 43 years on and you're still going on about it...
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> Dang, I was only a year old when hal came out? =C2=A0That just doubled=
my
>>>> age.
>>>> =C2=A0It's closer to what I feel like tho.
>>>>
>>>> I'm still not happy with /usr being required tho. =C2=A0That is still
>>>> standing
>>>> on a bad nerve. =C2=A0Don't worry tho, I got plenty of those bad nerve=
s. =C2=A0:-P
>>>>
>>> Do you know that there's a plan to move /var/run to / also? ;-)
>>>
>>> Rgds,
>>>
>>>
>>> Now someone on here swears up and down that /var isn't going to be
>>> required
>>> on /.
>>
>> /var !=3D /var/run
>> /var !=3D /var/lock
>>
>> /var/run is going in /run, but /var/run (by definition) only contains
>> things like PID files and runtime sockets. In the same vein, /var/lock
>> also is going into /run/lock. I have acknowledged this from the very
>> beginning, and I have been pointing out that implying that because
>> those two (really small and bounded) directories of /var are going
>> into /run and /run/lock, it doesn't mean that the whole /var will go
>> into /. That is disinformation.
>>
>> Nobody has even proposed that /var should go into the same partition
>> as /. *Nobody*, and the simplest proof of that is that nobody has
>> produced a single proof to the contrary. Not a single email, blog
>> post, or wiki entry from any system developer even mentions the
>> possibility of requiring /var to be in the same partition as /.
>>
>> Whoever says that /var will be required to be on the same partition as
>> / is either wildly speculating, or spreading FUD.
>
> So /var/run and /var/lock isn't on /var? =C2=A0Even if they will be linki=
ng to
> another location, the link has to be there for whatever program to follow=
.
> =C2=A0If /var isn't mounted yet, there is nothing for the program to find=
.
The link goes the other way around. /run and /lock are the real
directories, /var/run is a link to /run, /var/lock is a link to
/run/lock. When the initramfs (or the init system) mount /var, they
make the link.
> When I saw the messages about LVM and /var, that caused LVM to fail to
> start. =C2=A0I wouldn't put / on LVM and wouldn't expect it to work witho=
ut a
> init thingy either. =C2=A0Thing is, based on it failing, you can't have /=
var on a
> separate partition and expect LVM to start. =C2=A0So, if you use LVM for =
/usr
> and/or /var, you have to have a init thingy even if / is on a regular fil=
e
> system.
Yes, as I said in my last mail, if you need LVM, you need an
initramfs. Remove the LVM, and you can have /var (and /usr for that
matter) withouth an initramfs. Where/when did I say something
different?
>>> I'm telling ya'll, /home is coming.
>>
>> That is just ridiculous.
>
> I would have said the same thing about /usr a year ago. =C2=A0I'm not say=
ing it
> is coming next week but . . .
You can speculate all you want. Fact is, nobody has proposed that, and
there is not even a single email suggesting that it will be necessary.
On the contrary, the requirement for an initramfs or a /usr inside the
same partition as / has been being discussed years ago; if you had
followed the developers lists, you wil had hear about it months before
it happened.
Nothing similar has happened with /var, least of it /home.
>>> =C2=A0 We are going to end up where we
>>> can only have one drive in our Linux boxes for the OS and its relatives=
.
>>
>> And so is this: more FUD.
>>
>>> That or we will ALL have to start using the pesky init* thingy.
>>
>> More FUD: the current proposal (from Zac, the principal coder of
>> portage, and someone who actually wrotes code and know what he is
>> talking about) is this:
>>
>>
>> http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_20749880f5bc5feda141488498729f=
e8.xml
>>
>> It basically removes the need for a "pesky init* thingy", although for
>> the life of me I cannot understand why someone will not see the
>> technical advantages of actually using an initramfs.
>
> I'll have to read his link later.
Please do.
>>> I got 7 acres of land here, complete with trees. =C2=A0If someone can f=
ind the
>>> dev that started this mess, I can find some rope. =C2=A0Just saying. =
=C2=A0;-) =C2=A0Oh,
>>> I
>>> live half a mile from the river too. =C2=A0Makes for a good dump site. =
=C2=A0lol
>>>
>>> I noticed the other day that when LVM tries to start, it fails. =C2=A0I=
have
>>> /var
>>> on a separate partition here. =C2=A0It was complaining about something =
on /var
>>> missing. =C2=A0So, you may be late in reporting this. =C2=A0I think it =
is already
>>> needed for LVM if /usr or /var is on a separate partition.
>>
>> Again, get the facts right. If you use LVM you will need to use an
>> initramfs. If you only use a separated /usr you will be able to use
>> Zac's proposal.
>>
>> In no case whatsoever you will be required to have /var on the same
>> partition as /. Nobody has ever proposed that. /run and /run/lock are
>> not /var.
>>
>> Regards.
>
> No one proposed that /usr was required until just recently.
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.comp.sysutils.systemd.devel/1337
That was on February 25, this year. *Eight* months ago. And the stable
udev in Gentoo still "supports" (it really doesn't, but whatever) a
separated /usr.
> Saying it won't
> happen really puts you in a bad spot when or if it does. =C2=A0If you kno=
w this
> for sure and certain, I want your crystal ball.
It's called an "educated guess". Of course I could be wrong; but I am
more than willing to bet a nice expensive dinner with anyone that it
is not going to happen in the next ten years. Any takers?
> Just for the record, I don't want a init thingy because it is yet one mor=
e
> thing to fail when booting. =C2=A0I was forced to use one when I was on M=
andrake
> and I hated it. =C2=A0It isn't the only reason I switched but it was one =
reason.
> =C2=A0Now that same reason is coming to Gentoo.
No is not: if you are talking about Mandrake and not Mandriva, then
you did not used an initramfs. You used an initrd, and it was
completely different.
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