Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "Canek Peláez Valdés" <caneko@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Opinion against /usr merge
Date: Wed, 18 Jul 2012 19:04:06
Message-Id: CADPrc80hK1nN87J3f7HDY5fPsJ9SsmmrEOQxcmYZd4RVJN+Agw@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Opinion against /usr merge by Michael Mol
1 On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 1:53 PM, Michael Mol <mikemol@×××××.com> wrote:
2 > On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Alec Warner <antarus@g.o> wrote:
3 [snip]
4 >> Debian uses initramfs-tools...
5 >
6 > AFAIK, neither genkernel nor dracut were expected to get tied to the
7 > Gentoo update process. Has that changed?
8
9 The kernel you are running (if you update your machine) is not tied to
10 the Gentoo update process. The *source code* gets installed, but the
11 kernel source remains unchanged in /usr/src/whatever. It's the user
12 responsibility to configure, compile, and install the kernel (and then
13 update LILO, grub-legacy or GRUB2). It can be automated with (ta-da)
14 genkernel, but it's not "tied to the Gentoo update process".
15
16 I really don't see that much difference with needing to also update
17 the initramfs, if needed.
18
19 Because, besides, if your /usr is not in a different partition, you
20 don't even *need* an initramfs. In that case not using an initramfs is
21 supported by all upstreams.
22
23 Regards.
24 --
25 Canek Peláez Valdés
26 Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación
27 Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Opinion against /usr merge Michael Mol <mikemol@×××××.com>