On Sun, Sep 29, 2013 at 12:58 PM, Tanstaafl <tansta...@libertytrek.org> wrote: > On 2013-09-28 4:17 PM, Neil Bothwick <n...@digimed.co.uk> wrote: >> >> On Sat, 28 Sep 2013 19:04:41 +0000, Alan Mackenzie wrote: >> >>>> I suppose that what I am about to say isn't really relevant, but it is >>>> unfortunate over the past year that people blamed udev specifically >>>> for this. It is true that it does things that don't work if /usr isn't >>>> mounted, but eudev does as well, since it is basically the same code. >>> >>> >>> Who else is there to blame? We are continually being told that a >>> separate /usr is "broken", as though this were some unfortunate act of >>> <insert your deity here>, much like an earthquake. This gets >>> patronising really quickly. (Please note, I'm NOT blaming you here. I >>> appreciate that you're as much victim as Dale or me or anyone else >>> round here.) >> >> >> It's evolution. Linux has for years been moving in this direction, now it >> has reached the point where the Gentoo devs can no longer devote the >> increasing time needed to support what has now become an dge case. > > > So the solution is to give users one MONTH to prepare? Why not 6 months, or > better, a year? What for gods sake is the rush??? > > Where are the links/pointers to the INTERNAL discussions of this decision? I > seriously want to know. If gentoo devs are not willing to provide a 'paper > trail' for how this decision was arrived at, and let others judge their > decisions based on the merits of their arguments, then what does that say > about their true motivations/intentions?
The discussion happened in [1], [2], and [3]. And in similar meetings and mailing lists since months ago. [1] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.project/2946 [2] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/council/meeting-logs/20130924.txt [3] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/88282 All has been made in the open; if you subscribed to gentoo-dev, or to genoo-project, you would know about this changes since months ago. > Again, I don't have a problem necessarily with what is being decided (no > separate /usr without an initramfs), my problem is with the implementation - > giving us one MONTH before we can expect possible breakage with each and > every update. How much time do you need? Six months? A year? > The other HUGE thing that worries me, and has me seriously considering > switching to FreeBSD NOW, is, maybe there really is a secret, underlying > ulterior motive to force both systemd AND an initramfs for everyone in ALL > use cases. If that is the case, then say so now, and give those of us who do > not want this advanced notice, and I'll just plan on setting my gentoo box > to never update on Nov 1, and start working on learning FreeBSD and if > necessary, pay someone to help me migrate services to it. Read the discussion: the change was proposed by William Hubbs, the OpenRC maintainer. You know, the *other* init system? The change was backed by the council and, it seems, most Gentoo developers, many of whom doesn't use (and some don't like) systemd. No bogeyman here, no grand conspiracy. Read the logs. > But before I do that, I guess due diligence demands that I now go to the > FreeBSD support lists/forums (whatever they use) to confirm that FreeBSD > does NOT and never WILL require an initramfs (preferably the reason being > architectural differences in the kernel itself). Thankfully they have their > own init system, so no worrying about systemd invading there... I hope... systemd, according to its author, will never support *BSD. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
