On 03/14/2012 19:44, Greg KH wrote: > > Oh, and somehow "consensus" will work? No, sorry, it will not.
If compelling arguments were used, yes, you can sometimes trigger people to change their minds and arrive at a consensus. But outright dismissing them as if that will make them disappear is what won't work. > So it's not a "we know best", it's a "it will not properly work > otherwise." Udev is the only package I have installed in my VM setup that fails at boot with a separate /usr and no initramfs. And that isn't even a fatal failure, but it is a failure none the less, at least by virtue of OpenRC flagging the fact that udev returned an error code. Everything else works fine. But it's not udev that is broke, is it? It's my setup, right? I've been wrong for the last 10 years? Why was this ever referenced then in the Security Handbook? See Code Listing 1.1: http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/security/security-handbook.xml?part=1&chap=4 > It is strange to watch people somehow think that if they complain > enough, or feel strongly enough, something is going to change here to > make this basic fact go away. It's human nature to complain or otherwise voice dissent, especially when someone or something comes along and declares that what used to JustWork(TM) now NoLongerWorks(TM). Does that mean my dissent matters? Probably not. But that's not going to stop me from trying. -- Joshua Kinard Gentoo/MIPS ku...@gentoo.org 4096R/D25D95E3 2011-03-28 "The past tempts us, the present confuses us, the future frightens us. And our lives slip away, moment by moment, lost in that vast, terrible in-between." --Emperor Turhan, Centauri Republic
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
