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 A94DC1381F3 for ; Mon, 19 Aug 2013 14:39:17 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 479F1E0F2B; Mon, 19 Aug 2013 14:39:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ve0-f175.google.com (mail-ve0-f175.google.com [209.85.128.175]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 32DC2E0E56 for ; Mon, 19 Aug 2013 14:39:12 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ve0-f175.google.com with SMTP id oy10so3060333veb.34 for ; Mon, 19 Aug 2013 07:39:12 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=k+feUEEGNmSt4EAWBXDN7SSWjVjR3Lamx9iM3ia+77Y=; b=LJhcZJ1ccew874k2tFSjeOn1lpgRbtTmnmGcDH9CFndIuMh2zsnKhHNZeC6lJcTbXW DVj9Y1gE30FwDe/aEHBg+C+PP6u92Vs7ZibUfffeRPKXtuws+GNrH+I6zZ0djqSJKztk GIi8DFXbQZ0IWurzj4gHT6iqllemRDjPIYS/cb15qV9LBYPFTexja8C5Vz2g1IQBPbhS Zdge5STyP+D6yKFhWbpT92w50pWTfhUyQ/OrL+LM/UfcM15BVKrjSrN/fVtT/RczoQsG 0QYyQCTyMj+Ic7Gr59mFDSfPN8zIS0AoK8jTfEKTSoe7e9wlPICQmUruW8d7j/4xtM+6 oEwA== 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 10.220.11.7 with SMTP id r7mr13758053vcr.12.1376923152358; Mon, 19 Aug 2013 07:39:12 -0700 (PDT) Sender: alon.barlev@gmail.com Received: by 10.58.255.193 with HTTP; Mon, 19 Aug 2013 07:39:12 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <5211226F.2000000@libertytrek.org> <201308182208.43780.michaelkintzios@gmail.com> <521142A7.1020702@coolmail.se> <52121D0F.5030004@libertytrek.org> Date: Mon, 19 Aug 2013 17:39:12 +0300 X-Google-Sender-Auth: v1mF8O4rMDU2ptpT5XUiCjqYdLk Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Optional /usr merge in Gentoo From: Alon Bar-Lev To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: ce28e414-7fa3-4c81-a4ef-f2f10505b173 X-Archives-Hash: 71e8dfbaca9de4d12eafb7b91761b79b On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 5:37 PM, Alecks Gates wrote: > On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 9:30 AM, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: >> On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 5:20 PM, Alecks Gates wrote= : >>> On Mon, Aug 19, 2013 at 8:26 AM, Tanstaafl = wrote: >>>> >>>> On 2013-08-18 10:55 PM, Canek Pel=C3=A1ez Vald=C3=A9s wrote: >>>>> >>>>> And, putting aside systemd and getting back on topic to the council's >>>>> decision of (eventually) not supporting separated /usr without an >>>>> initramfs; have you ever stopped to consider that, perhaps, that's th= e >>>>> best *technical* decision? (*gasp*) >>>> >>>> >>>> That is *not* the concern here, Canek, and that should be obvious from= the comments here. >>>> >>>> Repeat: the primary concern is *not* about separate /usr without initr= amfs. >>>> >>>> The primary concern is that systemd will eventually be shoved down our= throats whether we want it or not, and using eudev or mdev or *anything* = other than systemd (ie OpenRC/eudev) will. >>>> >>> *snip* >>>> >>>>> When you have almost all distributions converging on that, and even >>>>> *the OpenRC maintainer* (which is the one pushing this, BTW, not the >>>>> systemd guys) supporting that decision, don't you think that perhaps, >>>>> just*perhaps*, everybody screaming about the sky falling (which, BTW, >>>>> >>>>> they are certainly noisy, but I really don't think are that many) are >>>>> overreacting and even (*gasp* again) wrong? >>>> >>>> >>>> Again, the main issue is not about separate /usr, so please stop tryin= g to deflect the subject... >>>> >>> >>> Isn't that what this thread is about? "Optional /usr merge in Gentoo" >>> >>> Can someone please explain to me what's so hard and/or complicated >>> about making an initramfs? At this point in time it's extremely >>> simple for me, but I only manage relatively simple systems (although >>> I'd like that to change soon). All I do is add one extra line (for >>> example - "dracut -H --kver=3D3.11.0-rc6") to my kernel install >>> procedure. >>> >>> Granted, the only reason I have an initramfs is for the plymouth >>> splash screen (other systems aren't desktops) -- but from everything I >>> can see it's not too complicated otherwise. >> >> Yeah... it is not complicated to but Windows as well, or IBM os-390!!! >> >> You use a tool that hides the initramfs building, and you are amazed >> it is simple? > > Dracut isn't *hiding* anything from me, I just don't need anything > more complicated -- who said I'm amazed? > >> >> The files within the initramfs generation tool are compiled using >> different tool than portage, they are not updated when distribution is >> updated, and they are not even at same version within portage tree. > > Why does this matter? Are there some huge security vulnerabilities > I'm unaware of? >> >> It may be acceptable for you... but do not expect everyone will accept >> your setup. > > Don't mind me, I'm just looking for the logic. Feel free to explain it t= o me. What do you mean "Don't mind me"? I don't mind you... as long as you don't force me to do anything... >> >> Regards, >> Alon >> > > -- > Alecks Gates >