Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Let's redesign the entire filesystem!
Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2012 15:30:22
Message-Id: 4F620ADC.1080409@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Let's redesign the entire filesystem! by Joshua Kinard
On 03/15/2012 05:27 AM, Joshua Kinard wrote:
> On 03/14/2012 20:45, Zac Medico wrote: > >> On 03/14/2012 05:36 PM, David Leverton wrote: >>> On 14 March 2012 23:47, Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o> wrote: >>>> It's more about what we're _not_ doing that what we're doing. >>> >>> Clearly something must have changed in udev 181 to make >>> /usr-without-initramfs not work anymore, and someone must have done >>> something to make that change happen, unless udev has aquired the >>> ability to evolve by itself. >> >> You're pointing your finger at udev, but the udev change is just a >> symptom of a more general shift away from supporting the "/ is a >> self-contained boot disk that is independent of /usr" use case. > > > I think it's better to say that udev is one of the more important components > of your average Linux system that's decided to support a unified root + /usr > filesystem. If we were looking at some non-critical, non-boot service that > made this decision, then we wouldn't be having this discussion.
They're intertwined though, since having a unified root implies that there is no support for the "/ is a self-contained boot disk that is independent of /usr" use case, and the bulk of people's opposition to having a unified root seems to stem from their dependence on the "/ is a self-contained boot disk that is independent of /usr" use case. So, the question at the heart of the whole discussion is: Should we support the "/ is a self-contained boot disk that is independent of /usr" use case? -- Thanks, Zac