Re: [gentoo-dev] Opinion against /usr merge

[Michael Mol]

On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 3:05 PM, Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 2:53 PM, Michael Mol <mikemol@×××××.com> wrote:
>> AFAIK, neither genkernel nor dracut were expected to get tied to the
>> Gentoo update process. Has that changed?
>
> We don't even update kernels as part of the regular update process,
> let alone initramfs systems.
>
> In general you update them together.
>
> The only issue I could see is if problems arise if you have a
> different version of udev in your initramfs than on your system.  I
> don't know if that actually causes problems.  For the most part after
> the system is booted the initramfs is done its job.

The most widely touted benefit I've heard for initramfs is its
capability to ease system recovery in case, e.g. a critical filesystem
refuses to mount. With recovery roles come recovery tools, which
quickly extends network-aware tools and a security attack surface.

Hence why I tend to feel that if an initramfs is going to become the
go-to solution for bootstrapping userland, it's important to consider
the difficulties of keeping the packed tools up-to-date; it's not just
a bootstrap tool, it's also the first recovery option a sysadmin
faces.

>
> If some package did need a kernel/initramfs/etc to be updated it
> should be the subject of news or an ewarn unless it becomes routine
> practice.  I don't think we want the system to start touching these
> things without operator intervention unless we make it really
> bulletproof like they do on big distros (the only reason they can is
> they have one-size-fits-all kernels and initramfs designs).

Absolutely.

-- 
:wq