[gentoo-user] udev with separate /usr and no initramfs

[gentoo-user] udev with separate /usr and no initramfs

[Steven J Long]

Hi,

 Following the debates over the summer, about plans to require an initramfs
for udev, I put together a slightly different approach using the dependency
tracking in openrc. It's outlined (in Unsupported Software) at:
http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-6866484.html
and consists of a couple of simple patches to the initscripts for udev and
udev-mount, supporting a new initramfs option (defaults to "yes") in 
udev.conf. I've been using it on my desktop at home for a couple of months
now and it works like a charm here. As ever, YMMV.

As I state in the post:
This is only for people who know they have all the modules built-in the 
kernel to mount local filesystems, have a separate /usr and/or /var, and are 
happy with their current setups, apart from possible future issues with udev 
starting before localmount, and find the requirement for an initramfs 
sufficiently annoying to tweak their setups, *and* are willing to deal with 
keeping the lines in the initscripts during etc-updates. 

This is on stable udev (164-r2.) I'm not running unstable, so be careful if
you are, and let us know if there are any changes needed. You can get in 
touch on IRC, or via the forum post.

HTH,
igli.
-- 
#friendly-coders -- We're friendly, but we're not /that/ friendly ;-)

Re: [gentoo-user] udev with separate /usr and no initramfs

[Michael Schreckenbauer]

Hi,

Am Dienstag, 8. November 2011, 19:24:11 schrieb Steven J Long:
> Hi,
> 
>  Following the debates over the summer, about plans to require an initramfs
> for udev, I put together a slightly different approach using the dependency
> tracking in openrc. It's outlined (in Unsupported Software) at:
> http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-6866484.html
> and consists of a couple of simple patches to the initscripts for udev and
> udev-mount, supporting a new initramfs option (defaults to "yes") in
> udev.conf. I've been using it on my desktop at home for a couple of months
> now and it works like a charm here. As ever, YMMV.

interesting approach.

> As I state in the post:
> This is only for people who know they have all the modules built-in the
> kernel to mount local filesystems, have a separate /usr and/or /var, and are
> happy with their current setups, apart from possible future issues with
> udev starting before localmount, and find the requirement for an initramfs
> sufficiently annoying to tweak their setups, *and* are willing to deal with
> keeping the lines in the initscripts during etc-updates.
> 
> This is on stable udev (164-r2.) I'm not running unstable, so be careful if
> you are, and let us know if there are any changes needed. You can get in
> touch on IRC, or via the forum post.

I am running ~amd64 and I'll try this, when I have some spare time. I'll let 
you know, how it works for me. Thanks a lot for this.

> HTH,
> igli.

Best,
Michael

[gentoo-user] Re: udev with separate /usr and no initramfs

[Steven J Long]

>> This is on stable udev (164-r2.) I'm not running unstable, so be careful
>> if you are, and let us know if there are any changes needed. You can get
>> in touch on IRC, or via the forum post.
-- or ofc this list.

Michael Schreckenbauer wrote:
> 
> I am running ~amd64 and I'll try this, when I have some spare time. I'll
> let you know, how it works for me.
Great, thanks :)

Regards,
Steve.
-- 
#friendly-coders -- We're friendly, but we're not /that/ friendly ;-)

[gentoo-user] Re: udev with separate /usr and no initramfs

[Steven J Long]

Some fool wrote:
> Following the debates over the summer, about plans to require an
> initramfs for udev, I put together a slightly different approach using
> the dependency tracking in openrc. It's outlined (in Unsupported Software) 
> at: http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-p-6866484.html

Just wondering if anyone else besides the one user who's reported a 
succesful result has tried this.

I realise people are experimenting with mdev and static devices; the latter
in particular would be of interest on that forum thread, but I'd also like 
to know if anyone has got any feedback on udev without initramfs, especially
on unstable.

I'm not knocking the mdev option, and would love to see a forum thread on 
how to set that up: the more options the better AFAIC. Just that udev is the 
official upstream kernel thing, AFAIK, and might be more suited for the 
general desktop end-user, especially with devices that only have udev helper 
scripts (eg I've heard about wifi and bluetooth.)

Regards,
steveL.
-- 
#friendly-coders -- We're friendly, but we're not /that/ friendly ;-)