1 |
On Sun, 2012-01-01 at 15:33 +0800, Patrick Lauer wrote: |
2 |
> On 01/01/12 15:12, Olivier Crête wrote: |
3 |
> > Hi, |
4 |
> > |
5 |
> > On Sat, 2011-12-31 at 19:59 -0600, William Hubbs wrote: |
6 |
> >> I have been working with robbat2 on solutions to the separate /usr issue |
7 |
> >> (That is why I have specifically cc'd him on this email) |
8 |
> >> which will allow people to not use an initramfs. If we migrate |
9 |
> >> everything off of the root fs to /usr, all of those solutions become |
10 |
> >> moot. On the other hand, if we don't migrate, we run the risk of |
11 |
> >> eventually having our default configuration not supported by upstream. |
12 |
> > I think the general consensus among other distros is that initramfs is |
13 |
> > the new /. Many core elements of the Linux system will start installing |
14 |
> > themselves in /usr, starting with udev, so we won't have a choice |
15 |
> > anyway. Also, I doubt it's currently possible to boot a Gentoo system |
16 |
> > without /usr mounted anyway. |
17 |
> "initramfs is the new /" ... and no one asked if maybe that doesn't |
18 |
> really make sense? |
19 |
> |
20 |
> That people are now actively working on forcing one big system partition |
21 |
> is annoying, but I really don't see the need to add a layer or two of |
22 |
> complexification just because, well, why not. |
23 |
|
24 |
We're absolutely not forcing a single system partition. We're just |
25 |
saying that the bits required to mount all the partitions you want |
26 |
should be in an initramfs. |
27 |
|
28 |
> >> 1) Start migrating packages along with upstream and have everyone who |
29 |
> >> has a separate /usr (including me by the way) start using an initramfs |
30 |
> >> of some kind, either dracut or one that we generate specifically for |
31 |
> >> gentoo. The reason I suggest the initramfs, is, unfortunately if we |
32 |
> >> migrate everything, nothing else would work. |
33 |
> > I also don't see a good reason to not adopt dracut, |
34 |
> Make it work and I'll reconsider it, until then genkernel wins by default. |
35 |
> > re-implementing |
36 |
> > something that already works and is maintained by a competent upstream |
37 |
> > seems wasteful to me. I really don't see why people resist using an |
38 |
> > initramfs so much. |
39 |
> What does it add, apart from time to the boot process? For some setups |
40 |
> (like my notebook with luks+lvm) there's no reasonable way around it, |
41 |
> but on my desktop it's worse than useless. |
42 |
|
43 |
I don't see how it adds time to the boot process. Either you have a |
44 |
single big partition (and then you don't even need an initramfs), or you |
45 |
have multiple partitions and then most of the time is mounting them |
46 |
anyway. |
47 |
|
48 |
> > The udev/kmod/systemd/dracut effort to standardise the base userspace of |
49 |
> > Linux is probably scary for quite a few Gentoo-ers as it means that the |
50 |
> > end result of an installed Gentoo system will be less differentiated |
51 |
> > than it was before. But it still is a step in the right direction as |
52 |
> > most of these standardized pieces are much better than what we currently |
53 |
> > have. The OpenRC/baselayout-2 fiasco, not much better than baselayout-1 |
54 |
> > and unmaintained upstream shows that even a relatively large |
55 |
> > distribution like us can't maintain a competitive base system solution, |
56 |
> Eh what? |
57 |
> |
58 |
> I don't see an advantage in replacing a known-good solution with some |
59 |
> random stuff that mostly doesn't work yet just because it's the future. |
60 |
|
61 |
Random stuff that was well though to work together and works well enough |
62 |
that all other major distros are adopting it. |
63 |
|
64 |
> > adopting the udev/kmod/systemd way will allow us to use all the work |
65 |
> > that they are doing and instead concentrate on making a better system. |
66 |
> > |
67 |
> "Better" means no lennartware to me. I want to be able to fully debug |
68 |
> init script failures, which systemd makes very hard to impossible. On |
69 |
> some machines I have changes in the startup that would mean having to |
70 |
> hack up something in C and hope that it doesn't crash init for systemd |
71 |
> (what the bleeeep?) |
72 |
|
73 |
You can start services with a shell scripts in systemd, you just have to |
74 |
aim the .service unit file to you shellscript.. |
75 |
|
76 |
> Please don't try to bring the GnomeOS vision of having MacOS without |
77 |
> paying for it to my computing experience ... |
78 |
|
79 |
Honestly, so many things just work on MacOS and just need hours of |
80 |
tweaking for us.. |
81 |
|
82 |
-- |
83 |
Olivier Crête |
84 |
tester@g.o |
85 |
Gentoo Developer |