| 1 |
On 06/01/2013 11:23 AM, Steven J. Long wrote: |
| 2 |
> That's not an argument for using a symlink switcher or the |
| 3 |
> equivalent across the board, by any means. |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
Your opinion. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
> Firstly, we should be recommending people install Gentoo with enough |
| 8 |
> flexibility to configure and use their system how they choose. In the |
| 9 |
> UEFI arena, why not simply recommend something like rEFIt instead of |
| 10 |
> making everyone go through a load of development effort, to restrict |
| 11 |
> us all to a crippled use-case? |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Beside rEFIt being deprecated and rEFInd being in early stage of |
| 14 |
development (thus working great on some platforms and not working at all |
| 15 |
on some other) and with a good chunk of documentation to read before |
| 16 |
being able of deploying it? |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
> NOTE: If you still wish to pursue a fixed config, then it's easy |
| 19 |
> enough to build it with init=/sbin/einit since presumably you want |
| 20 |
> that setup for your users. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Had been considered |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
> All I'm saying is: can we please stop trying to reinvent the kernel, |
| 25 |
> which accepts a bootloader parameter from initramfs as well, and |
| 26 |
> focus instead on the difficult part: making sure the system is in a |
| 27 |
> fit state to switch in the first place. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
... |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
> That's where the development effort is needed, if you are to provide |
| 32 |
> a mechanism to switch. The symlink and hooks etc is a total dead-end, |
| 33 |
> imo. It's simply reinventing the wheel using octagons instead of |
| 34 |
> circles. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
IMHO you hadn't read enough about it. |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
> There's nothing to stop systemd being the default init, should you |
| 39 |
> want to put the install together like that. Because let's be honest: |
| 40 |
> someone has to put this install together, irrespective of how |
| 41 |
> incapable the end-user is of editing a file by themselves. And just |
| 42 |
> because the user can do it simply, that's no reason to make our |
| 43 |
> method to do it any more complex (I've never heard such a bizarre |
| 44 |
> argument.) Just edit the file via script. |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
I do not care about systemd. |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
> FOCUS on getting the system safe to switch. Not on reinventing |
| 49 |
> init/main.c, badly. |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
You should read the whole thread before commenting like this that late. |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
lu |
Archives