(Huh, all emails are CCing listmaster - let's drop them for this
 subthread for now.)

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 07:46:31AM +0100, Klaus Ethgen wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA512
> 
> Hi Martin,
> 
> Am Di den 29. Nov 2016 um 22:36 schrieb Martin Pitt:
> > Cristian Ionescu-Idbohrn [2016-11-29 22:16 +0100]:
> > > Eversince systemd came about into debian, you've shown direct or
> > > indirect disrespect, IMO, to people objecting against screwing up
> > > their systems, where they want to keep sysv instead of adopting
> > > systemd world domination.
> > 
> > The root issue here is not about the init system, but how initramfses
> > and separate partitions play together. Separate /usr without an initrd
> > has always been slightly broken,
> 
> No, it worked well for decades and it was exactly why you have small
> root and resizable /usr on other medias.

In your imagination, that is (yes, I too can write stupid replies
without any arguments - but I actually can provide arguments too,
see below).

> 
> It start getting broken when systemd start taking over the world.
> 
> > So, the set of what can be supported is certainly debatable, but as
> > history has shown it neither makes sense to support this use case nor
> > did anyone manage to actually do it. Hence the "wontfix".
> 
> As history shows, that is common use case and makes fully sense.

It used to make sense, but it never really worked, as you cannot make
a reasonable static decision as to what goes into / vs /usr. And thus,
some people had stuff like network they needed for mounting /usr or
otherwise early in boot, but the binaries for that happened to be in
/usr.

*All* these problems were solved with the introduction of initramfs,
which allows us to make the decision as to a minimal root filesystem
dynamically on the actual system.

Why maintain a second solution that is a lot of work, (because it)
always breaks, and only solves a small subset of the problems?

> 
> > Also, *if* you want to make this about systemd vs. SysV again:
> 
> Well, systemd, or better the religiosity, systemd is spread, is part of
> this particular problem. Exactly that is the case, why so many users
> oppose systemd.
> 
> However, this should be fight somewhere else. Here we have a real
> problem, that is easily fixable. Look at devuan or debian jessie. Just
> do not link against libsystemd what pulls in too many uncontrollable
> dependencies.

Just accept reality and move on.

There is no reason to try to keep that separate / madness up anymore:

(1) we have better solutions now
(2) nobody really uses the it -> no testing

-- 
Debian Developer - deb.li/jak | jak-linux.org - free software dev
                  |  Ubuntu Core Developer |
When replying, only quote what is necessary, and write each reply
directly below the part(s) it pertains to ('inline').  Thank you.

_______________________________________________
Pkg-systemd-maintainers mailing list
Pkg-systemd-maintainers@lists.alioth.debian.org
http://lists.alioth.debian.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pkg-systemd-maintainers

Reply via email to