| 1 |
Michał Górny wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tue, 10 Jan 2012 12:56:11 -0600 |
| 3 |
> Dale<rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> Michał Górny wrote: |
| 6 |
>>> On Tue, 10 Jan 2012 19:14:52 +0100 |
| 7 |
>>> Enrico Weigelt<weigelt@×××××.de> wrote: |
| 8 |
>>> |
| 9 |
>>>> * Micha?? Górny<mgorny@g.o> schrieb: |
| 10 |
>>>> |
| 11 |
>>>>> Does working hard involve compiling even more packages statically? |
| 12 |
>>>> I guess, he means keeping udev in / ? |
| 13 |
>>> Because adding 80 KiB of initramfs hurts so much? We should then put |
| 14 |
>>> more work just to ensure that admin doesn't have to waste 15 |
| 15 |
>>> minutes to recompile the kernel (if necessary), create an initramfs |
| 16 |
>>> and add it to bootloader config? |
| 17 |
>>> |
| 18 |
>> |
| 19 |
>> Took me days to get dracut to work. Where does 15 minutes come |
| 20 |
>> from? |
| 21 |
> I just took the time I needed to write an initramfs from scratch |
| 22 |
> and divided it by two, assuming using an already-made tool is simpler. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Wish it was like that for me. I never got one made from scratch to work. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
>> How much time does it take when the initramfs fails? |
| 28 |
> The same when rootfs fails? Only the fact that initramfs is less likely |
| 29 |
> to break than rootfs, and you have a pretty good opportunity now to |
| 30 |
> experiment with it while nothing on your system made it useless without |
| 31 |
> one. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Funny, I never had the rootfs fail before. I have had init thingys fail |
| 34 |
many many times. They lead to a reinstall since I had no idea how to |
| 35 |
fix it. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
> |
| 39 |
>> I keep hoping that all the smart people involved in this will see the |
| 40 |
>> mess it is creating. I'm not the sharpest tool in the shed but I'm |
| 41 |
>> sharp enough to see the mess this is going to create and I'm just a |
| 42 |
>> desktop user. I feel sorry for people with more complicated systems |
| 43 |
>> or remote ones. |
| 44 |
> The mess was created by people shouting 'hey, real men use |
| 45 |
> separate /usr for no good reason! Be awesome like us'. |
| 46 |
> |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
I think it is more like people do that when they have a good reason to |
| 49 |
do so. I plan to put mine on /usr when I get the chance and know that |
| 50 |
this init crap isn't going to break my rig. It's not being "awesome" |
| 51 |
either. |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
Dale |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
:-) :-) |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
-- |
| 58 |
I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words! |
| 59 |
|
| 60 |
Miss the compile output? Hint: |
| 61 |
EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--quiet-build=n" |
Archives