On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 2:48 PM, William Hubbs <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 27, 2012 at 01:49:50PM -0500, Rich Freeman wrote: >> Understood. However, the whole request to not have to support a >> separate /usr without an initramfs was brought up by the udev team. >> If udev doesn't have the need, then they should just go do what they >> want to do and stop asking the council to step in, as there apparently >> isn't anything for them to decide on. > > I wasn't actually asking the council to step in. I was just trying to > have a discussion here.
The Council WAS asked to step in: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20120403-summary.txt http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.project/1864/focus=1867 However, you are right, the udev team did not actually request this. So, if udev 180+ doesn't break anything that wasn't already broken in udev 179- then just go about your business... :) >> 1. It isn't my decision to make. This is the role of the Council. > > Tell me if I am wrong here. My understanding is that this is only true > if the community itself doesn't make the decision first. True, but I don't see any consensus on this topic. The /usr move is VERY controversial, at least within Gentoo. This really doesn't fall into the domain of any one project either - this affects the whole distro. Even if it did fall into the domain of a single project, anybody with half a brain would realize that you don't just do something like this on the initiative of a few individuals unless you want a really big mess on your hands. > If I were to start that thread now, I would change my introduction to > not specifically mention udev, systemd and kmod, but my view still is > that it will be better for us in the longrun if we do it. Maybe that is > a topic for another thread though. Agreed. There is no harm in discussing it. I'd love to see this as a supported Gentoo configuration, and perhaps even as the default. However, this should come down to a discussion of pros/cons, especially in terms of what kinds of opportunities it creates. Something I don't like about this whole debate is that it tends to come off as "I've never run an initramfs and darn it I want to keep it that way." Gentoo has always been a cutting-edge/innovative distro. We have prefix, hardened, x32, and we were among the first to support amd64. Sure, that flexibility also lets you get away without an initramfs where other distros simply cannot. However, the lack of an initramfs should not be a crutch. I could see the exact same argument unfolding 15 years ago about forcing users to have a bootloader like grub. Go bring up the suggestion that the kernel should support direct booting on lkml and I'm sure Linus will tell you to bugger_off... Rich
