| 1 |
On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 01:31:59PM -0800, Greg KH wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 09:03:40PM +0100, J. Roeleveld wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Olav Vitters <olav@×××××××.nl> wrote: |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> > >On Mon, Dec 17, 2012 at 09:29:26AM -0500, Richard Yao wrote: |
| 6 |
> > >> As I said in an earlier email, Lennart Poettering claims that it does |
| 7 |
> > >> not work. We are discussing some of the things necessary to make it |
| 8 |
> > >work. |
| 9 |
> > > |
| 10 |
> > >Just to repeat: |
| 11 |
> > >In this thread it was claimed that a separate /usr is not supported by |
| 12 |
> > >systemd/udev. |
| 13 |
> > > |
| 14 |
> > >A case which works with latest systemd on various distributions. I |
| 15 |
> > >checked with upstream (not Lennart), and they confirmed it works. I can |
| 16 |
> > >wait for Lennart to say the same, but really not needed. |
| 17 |
> > > |
| 18 |
> > >I assume this will again turn into a "but I meant something else". |
| 19 |
> > |
| 20 |
> > Olav. |
| 21 |
> > |
| 22 |
> > Lennart has stated that he considers a seperate /usr without init* broken. |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> Yes, as do I, and so do a lot of other developers. |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> But that is a system configuration issue, not a systemd issue, please |
| 27 |
> don't confuse the two. |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> > This has worked correctly in the past. |
| 30 |
> |
| 31 |
> Define "past" please. |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
> Note, it's still broken, I have yet to see any upstream fixes to resolve |
| 34 |
> all of the issues that are involved here with "fixing" this up. |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
> Yes, as always, for some subset of users, you can be lucky and it will |
| 37 |
> work for them, but those systems are getting rarer and rarer these days, |
| 38 |
> as the rest of upstream (not systemd here) are moving on and not doing |
| 39 |
> anything to change their behavior for this topic. |
| 40 |
> |
| 41 |
> > The direction udev development is going, according to Lennart, is to |
| 42 |
> > make that impossible and he refuses to fix this regression. |
| 43 |
> |
| 44 |
> Again, this has NOTHING to do with udev or systemd, as has been pointed |
| 45 |
> out numerous times. I understand your _wish_ that it would have |
| 46 |
> something to do with it, but that will not change the facts, sorry. |
| 47 |
> |
| 48 |
> > I am really happy with this project and intend on testing it once |
| 49 |
> > requests for this appear in the eudev mailing list. |
| 50 |
> |
| 51 |
> Good luck, the root problems still remain, and nothing that eudev ever |
| 52 |
> does can resolve that, sorry. |
| 53 |
> |
| 54 |
> Can this topic finally be put to rest please? There is a whole web page |
| 55 |
> devoted to this topic, why do people blindly ignore it? |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
This is a very good question. |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
> Again, a separate /usr without an initrd has NOTHING to do with systemd |
| 60 |
> or udev, with the minor exception that Gentoo's packaging of those |
| 61 |
> programs _might_ have an issue, but that is Gentoo's issue, NOT |
| 62 |
> upstream's issue. |
| 63 |
> |
| 64 |
> If anyone involved with eudev, or is involved with the Gentoo Council |
| 65 |
> thinks that the previous paragraph is incorrect, they are flat out |
| 66 |
> wrong. |
| 67 |
|
| 68 |
This all started with the April 2012 council meeting when it was pushed |
| 69 |
through that separate /usr without an initramfs is a supported |
| 70 |
configuration, so yes, the previous council started this issue. |
| 71 |
|
| 72 |
Also, yes, eudev believes they will be able to fix it. |
| 73 |
|
| 74 |
I am another one who has been pointing out how this is wrong multiple |
| 75 |
times but my statements about it are falling on deaf ears. |
| 76 |
|
| 77 |
William |
Archives