1 |
On 16 May 2012 05:21, Walter Dnes <waltdnes@××××××××.org> wrote: |
2 |
> On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 12:44:59AM +0200, Stelian Ionescu wrote |
3 |
>> On Tue, 2012-05-15 at 18:38 -0400, Walter Dnes wrote: |
4 |
>> > On Tue, May 15, 2012 at 11:26:03AM -0700, Greg KH wrote |
5 |
>> > > What specifically is your objection to udev today? Is it doing things |
6 |
>> > > you don't like? Too big? Something else? |
7 |
>> > |
8 |
>> > Today, it requires an initramfs if /usr is not physically on /. That |
9 |
>> > is due in large part to the fact that it has been rolled into the |
10 |
>> > systemd tarball, and inherited some of systemd's code and limitations, |
11 |
>> > despite the fact that udev is still a separate binary. |
12 |
>> |
13 |
>> This is absolutely and definitely false. Where did you hear such |
14 |
>> nonsense ? |
15 |
> |
16 |
> 1) Did you sleep through the /usr and initramfs flamewars? |
17 |
> http://freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/separate-usr-is-broken |
18 |
|
19 |
You seem to have missed the bit that this has nothing at all to do with systemd. |
20 |
|
21 |
-- |
22 |
Arun Raghavan |
23 |
http://arunraghavan.net/ |
24 |
(Ford_Prefect | Gentoo) & (arunsr | GNOME) |