1 |
On Sun, 01 Jan 2012 02:12:22 -0500 |
2 |
Olivier Crête <tester@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> Hi, |
5 |
> |
6 |
> On Sat, 2011-12-31 at 19:59 -0600, William Hubbs wrote: |
7 |
> > I have been working with robbat2 on solutions to the separate /usr |
8 |
> > issue (That is why I have specifically cc'd him on this email) |
9 |
> > which will allow people to not use an initramfs. If we migrate |
10 |
> > everything off of the root fs to /usr, all of those solutions become |
11 |
> > moot. On the other hand, if we don't migrate, we run the risk of |
12 |
> > eventually having our default configuration not supported by |
13 |
> > upstream. |
14 |
> |
15 |
> I think the general consensus among other distros is that initramfs is |
16 |
> the new /. Many core elements of the Linux system will start |
17 |
> installing themselves in /usr, starting with udev, so we won't have a |
18 |
> choice anyway. Also, I doubt it's currently possible to boot a Gentoo |
19 |
> system without /usr mounted anyway. |
20 |
> |
21 |
> > 1) Start migrating packages along with upstream and have everyone |
22 |
> > who has a separate /usr (including me by the way) start using an |
23 |
> > initramfs of some kind, either dracut or one that we generate |
24 |
> > specifically for gentoo. The reason I suggest the initramfs, is, |
25 |
> > unfortunately if we migrate everything, nothing else would work. |
26 |
> |
27 |
> I also don't see a good reason to not adopt dracut, re-implementing |
28 |
> something that already works and is maintained by a competent upstream |
29 |
> seems wasteful to me. I really don't see why people resist using an |
30 |
> initramfs so much. |
31 |
> |
32 |
> The udev/kmod/systemd/dracut effort to standardise the base userspace |
33 |
> of Linux is probably scary for quite a few Gentoo-ers as it means |
34 |
> that the end result of an installed Gentoo system will be less |
35 |
> differentiated than it was before. But it still is a step in the |
36 |
> right direction as most of these standardized pieces are much better |
37 |
> than what we currently have. The OpenRC/baselayout-2 fiasco, not much |
38 |
> better than baselayout-1 and unmaintained upstream shows that even a |
39 |
> relatively large distribution like us can't maintain a competitive |
40 |
> base system solution, adopting the udev/kmod/systemd way will allow |
41 |
> us to use all the work that they are doing and instead concentrate on |
42 |
> making a better system. |
43 |
> |
44 |
|
45 |
|
46 |
All of my systems currently have a seperate /usr that is mounted at |
47 |
boot. Unfortunately I do agree that this is not something that we can |
48 |
fight. This was brought up earlier and the only thing we can do |
49 |
for people like myself (who mount /usr at boot) is to create a simple |
50 |
initramfs that only has the purpose of mounting /usr at boot. The main |
51 |
thing I don't like about initramfs is that we have to regenerate it any |
52 |
time we update the packages that get included in it. |
53 |
|
54 |
-- |
55 |
Matthew Thode (prometheanfire) |