1 |
Michał Górny wrote: |
2 |
> On Wed, 18 Jan 2012 01:20:03 -0600 |
3 |
> Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote: |
4 |
> |
5 |
>> Michał Górny wrote: |
6 |
>>> On Tue, 17 Jan 2012 21:38:26 -0600 |
7 |
>>> Dale<rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote: |
8 |
>>> |
9 |
>>>> Michał Górny wrote: |
10 |
>>>>> On Tue, 10 Jan 2012 19:14:52 +0100 |
11 |
>>>>> Enrico Weigelt<weigelt@×××××.de> wrote: |
12 |
>>>>> |
13 |
>>>>>> * Micha?? Górny<mgorny@g.o> schrieb: |
14 |
>>>>>> |
15 |
>>>>>>> Does working hard involve compiling even more packages |
16 |
>>>>>>> statically? |
17 |
>>>>>> I guess, he means keeping udev in / ? |
18 |
>>>>> Because adding 80 KiB of initramfs hurts so much? We should then |
19 |
>>>>> put more work just to ensure that admin doesn't have to waste 15 |
20 |
>>>>> minutes to recompile the kernel (if necessary), create an |
21 |
>>>>> initramfs and add it to bootloader config? |
22 |
>>>>> |
23 |
>>>> 80Kbs? You sure about that? I somehow failed to mention this |
24 |
>>>> before. I noticed it when I saw another reply to this post. |
25 |
>>>> Reality check: |
26 |
>>> 80 KiB is enough for mounting plain /usr and booting with it. See |
27 |
>>> tiny-initramfs (but I haven't tested it thoroughly). |
28 |
>>> |
29 |
>> |
30 |
>> My plan is to have /usr on lvm. I think it will end up larger and it |
31 |
>> still adds one more thing to break. |
32 |
>> |
33 |
>> I really wish someone would get a better plan. I think I see a |
34 |
>> garbage dump ahead with lots of Linux distros headed that way. |
35 |
> |
36 |
> Better plan how? LVM requires udev for some reason. Letting rootfs grow |
37 |
> with data unnecessary for a number of users is no good plan either. |
38 |
> Just install that initramfs, be done with it and let us focus on actual |
39 |
> work rather than fixing random breakages. |
40 |
> |
41 |
> We already usually have separate /boot to satisfy the needs of |
42 |
> bootloader. Then you want us to chain yet another filesystem to satisfy |
43 |
> the needs of another layer. Initramfs reuses /boot for that. |
44 |
> |
45 |
|
46 |
|
47 |
The point is, I don't like initramfs. I don't want to use one. It's |
48 |
funny how I never needed one before either but now things are being |
49 |
broken. It's not LVM that is breaking it either. I wouldn't need the |
50 |
initramfs even if It was on a regular partition until the recent so |
51 |
called "improvements." |
52 |
|
53 |
Dale |
54 |
|
55 |
:-) :-) |
56 |
|
57 |
-- |
58 |
I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or |
59 |
how you interpreted my words! |
60 |
|
61 |
Miss the compile output? Hint: |
62 |
EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--quiet-build=n" |