On Thu, Sep 8, 2011 at 3:48 PM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckin...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Thu, 8 Sep 2011 11:13:58 -0400 > Canek Peláez Valdés <can...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > Have you *ever* thought about machines, that are not x86 or x86_64? >> > Here's an intersting read: >> > http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/72769 >> >> No, I haven't thought about them, because I don't use them. What it >> has to do with anything? > > Linux runs on many many many more arches than just x86 and amd64. IIRC > it's about 29 in total. > > Do you agree that the needs and requirements of all those other arches > might be important to everything else?
I'm not saying it's not important, I'm saying that the needs of the less used archs cannot slow down the development of the most popular ones. Again, is an economic reason: we don't have enough devs. > You keep mentioning "it will all work if you just use an initramfs". > Did it occur to you that that statement is the entire problem and > demonstrates the problem nicely? No, because it's not a solution decided because of laziness, which many here seem to think it is. > I do not have an initramfs, do not > need one, see no need to have one and have not yet seen a valid > technical reason for why having one is ideal. It's not "ideal" (I don't think anybody has said that). Almost nothing is "ideal" in computer science. Maybe it's not enough for you, but I repeat: we need dynamic /dev trees, udev giveus that, the udev code lives in user space, we need an early user space => initramfs. > My gentoo systems do not > run binary distros, I have no need for a generic mechanism designed to > cope with any hardware Fedora might happen to find itself booting on, > hardware that the devs have no idea of when they compile their distros. Hey, I compile all my modules inside my kernels. That has nothing to do with udev, because you can connect via USB or eSATA *any* hardware into your computer, and the /dev tree needs to update dynamically. Maybe *you* don't want that, and that's fine: but the majority of users do want that. Your use-case is not the most important one in the whole world. > I, on the other hand, already know everything I need to know about my > hardware for the purposes of booting, running udev and building a valid > kernel that fits my needs. Me too. And yet, I use an initramfs for the pretty plymouth splash screen. > Tell me again what it is that validly requires me to switch to some new > way of doing things? Nothing: if you don't like it, don't use it (or use an alternative), or change it. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
