| 1 |
On Fri, May 04, 2012 at 08:46:21PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Friday 04 May 2012 19:06:37 William Hubbs wrote: |
| 3 |
> > If you use an initramfs to pre-mount /usr, all of these issues are moot |
| 4 |
> > and things just work (tm). Mike's sep-usr use flag option on busybox |
| 5 |
> > may do this, but see below. |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> > - Separate /usr without initramfs blocks the /usr merge. |
| 8 |
> > In my original request to have your vote reviewed, I pointed out the |
| 9 |
> > document which asserts that the /usr merge is a good thing and pointed |
| 10 |
> > out the thread in which we discussed it on -dev. The arguments |
| 11 |
> > supporting it are strong, and I haven't seen any technical argument |
| 12 |
> > against it that would not be addressed by using an initramfs with |
| 13 |
> > separate /usr. If you are using an initramfs, you will never know |
| 14 |
> > when the /usr merge happens, but if you are using something like |
| 15 |
> > Mike's option your system is not compatible with the merge. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> why exactly do you say that ? i already explained that busybox[sep-usr] works |
| 18 |
> perfectly fine in a /usr-merged world. the /ginit static ELF literally needs |
| 19 |
> nothing else in the system to work. you could boot a rootfs where the only |
| 20 |
> thing in / was ginit and it wouldn't be a problem. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Ah ok, maybe this is the answer then. That's why I said above that I |
| 23 |
wasn't sure. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
If you are installing the ginit binary directly in /, we may be good |
| 26 |
to go. :-) |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
William |
Archives