1 |
On 03/14/2012 04:21 PM, David Leverton wrote: |
2 |
> On 14 March 2012 22:51, Greg KH <gregkh@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
>> Oh, that's simple, separate-/usr-without-initramfs will not work and |
4 |
>> will not be supported :) |
5 |
> |
6 |
> See, it's this "we're doing it this way because we know best and we |
7 |
> say so" that upsets people. |
8 |
|
9 |
It's more about what we're _not_ doing that what we're doing. What we're |
10 |
not doing is supporting the "/ is a self-contained boot disk that is |
11 |
independent of /usr" use case, simply because it's a huge maintenance |
12 |
burden and it doesn't make much sense in the post-initramfs world. The |
13 |
people who have a "problem" with this don't understand the burden and |
14 |
have no intention of taking on the burden themselves. Even if they |
15 |
wanted to take on the burden, they wouldn't be capable of it. If they |
16 |
were capable of taking on this burden then they would have already |
17 |
understood that the initramfs is the most reasonable solution to their |
18 |
perceived problem. |
19 |
-- |
20 |
Thanks, |
21 |
Zac |