(Huh, all emails are CCing listmaster - let's drop them for this subthread for now.)
On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 07:46:31AM +0100, Klaus Ethgen wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA512 > > Hi Martin, > > Am Di den 29. Nov 2016 um 22:36 schrieb Martin Pitt: > > Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn [2016-11-29 22:16 +0100]: > > > Eversince systemd came about into debian, you've shown direct or > > > indirect disrespect, IMO, to people objecting against screwing up > > > their systems, where they want to keep sysv instead of adopting > > > systemd world domination. > > > > The root issue here is not about the init system, but how initramfses > > and separate partitions play together. Separate /usr without an initrd > > has always been slightly broken, > > No, it worked well for decades and it was exactly why you have small > root and resizable /usr on other medias. In your imagination, that is (yes, I too can write stupid replies without any arguments - but I actually can provide arguments too, see below). > > It start getting broken when systemd start taking over the world. > > > So, the set of what can be supported is certainly debatable, but as > > history has shown it neither makes sense to support this use case nor > > did anyone manage to actually do it. Hence the "wontfix". > > As history shows, that is common use case and makes fully sense. It used to make sense, but it never really worked, as you cannot make a reasonable static decision as to what goes into / vs /usr. And thus, some people had stuff like network they needed for mounting /usr or otherwise early in boot, but the binaries for that happened to be in /usr. *All* these problems were solved with the introduction of initramfs, which allows us to make the decision as to a minimal root filesystem dynamically on the actual system. Why maintain a second solution that is a lot of work, (because it) always breaks, and only solves a small subset of the problems? > > > Also, *if* you want to make this about systemd vs. SysV again: > > Well, systemd, or better the religiosity, systemd is spread, is part of > this particular problem. Exactly that is the case, why so many users > oppose systemd. > > However, this should be fight somewhere else. Here we have a real > problem, that is easily fixable. Look at devuan or debian jessie. Just > do not link against libsystemd what pulls in too many uncontrollable > dependencies. Just accept reality and move on. There is no reason to try to keep that separate / madness up anymore: (1) we have better solutions now (2) nobody really uses the it -> no testing -- Debian Developer - deb.li/jak | jak-linux.org - free software dev | Ubuntu Core Developer | When replying, only quote what is necessary, and write each reply directly below the part(s) it pertains to ('inline'). Thank you.