On 19/08/2013 15:23, Tanstaafl wrote: > On 2013-08-19 6:04 AM, Alan McKinnon <[email protected]> wrote: >> It's not that separate /usr is broken - it's not. >> >> The issue is a separate /usr without an initramfs. And the issue ONLY >> occurs at early-boot time. > > And so, if this is the way it goes, this is the way it goes. > > As long as I can keep using eudev - even *if* it requires an initramfs > for a separate /usr (as long as it doesn't require one if you don't have > a separate /usr)... > > Can anyone answer *that* question please? >
Honestly, what you want is a full-fledged udev fork from just before systemd tainted it, and fully maintained to go in the direction we understood "classic" udev to be going. eudev and even mdev are a step in the right direction, but I believe they don't have enough muscle behind them, i.e. they end up cherry picking useful bits out of udev-subsumed-into-systemd. udev needs the same quality of maintainership now in a fork that it used to have. And it's probably only a matter of time before someone with those resources gets fed up with the current scene and does exactly that. For me, I'm not opposed to merging /usr. I'm not opposed to other people using systemd, I am opposed to *me* using it. For your other question, you don't need an initramfs if your /usr is not split off and drivers for your fs on / and chipset are compiled in. That will stay true for ages to come (until some joker starts shipping kernel drivers in /var....) -- Alan McKinnon [email protected]
