| 1 |
On Sat, Apr 9, 2016 at 1:34 PM, <waltdnes@××××××××.org> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sat, Apr 09, 2016 at 12:18:25PM -0500, »Q« wrote |
| 3 |
>> On Sat, 9 Apr 2016 12:09:38 -0400 |
| 4 |
>> waltdnes@××××××××.org wrote: |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>> > On Sat, Apr 09, 2016 at 07:11:31AM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote |
| 7 |
>> > |
| 8 |
>> > > It was simply a recognition that we were already in a state where |
| 9 |
>> > > booting a system without /usr mounted early can cause problems. |
| 10 |
>> > |
| 11 |
>> > For certain edge cases... yes. But they were already using |
| 12 |
>> > initramfs or merging /usr into /. I'm talking about the 95% who |
| 13 |
>> > don't really need it. |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
>> Booting without /usr mounted early is something Gentoo already doesn't |
| 16 |
>> support and can't support, right? |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> If you can read this post, you've got a mighty powerful imagination. |
| 19 |
> Because we all know that Gentoo can't boot, let alone send emails, from |
| 20 |
> a machine with separate /usr and no initramfs... just like I'm using |
| 21 |
> right now. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Nobody said it was not possible; Q said that it was not supported, and |
| 24 |
it cannot be because, in the general case (not *YOU* specific case), |
| 25 |
someone somewhere may require something from /usr to boot. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Regards. |
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
Dr. Canek Peláez Valdés |
| 30 |
Profesor de Carrera Asociado C |
| 31 |
Departamento de Matemáticas |
| 32 |
Facultad de Ciencias |
| 33 |
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México |
Archives