1 |
Zac Medico wrote: |
2 |
> On 01/21/2012 01:34 PM, Dale wrote: |
3 |
>> Michał Górny wrote: |
4 |
>>>> It's funny how I never needed one before either but now things are |
5 |
>>>> being broken. It's not LVM that is breaking it either. I wouldn't |
6 |
>>>> need the initramfs even if It was on a regular partition until the |
7 |
>>>> recent so called "improvements." |
8 |
>>> |
9 |
>>> ...and your main argument is 'long, long ago someone decided that it |
10 |
>>> should match the same taste as mine, so it should be like it forever'. |
11 |
>>> Of course, those times there were no such thing as an initramfs... |
12 |
>>> |
13 |
>> |
14 |
>> |
15 |
>> Then don't break that. Just because someone came up with a initramfs |
16 |
>> doesn't mean everyone should be forced to use one. |
17 |
> |
18 |
> The old way imposes requirements that are no longer supported by |
19 |
> upstream software. So, you basically have three choices: |
20 |
> |
21 |
> 1) Use old software that supports the old way |
22 |
> 2) Develop new software to support the old way |
23 |
> 3) Use an initramfs or pre-init script to mount /usr if it must be on |
24 |
> a separate partition |
25 |
|
26 |
|
27 |
So the solution is to break things because things are broken. Sort of |
28 |
running in circles there. Pardon me, I'm dizzy. |
29 |
|
30 |
Dale |
31 |
|
32 |
:-) :-) |
33 |
|
34 |
-- |
35 |
I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or |
36 |
how you interpreted my words! |
37 |
|
38 |
Miss the compile output? Hint: |
39 |
EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--quiet-build=n" |