1 |
On 2013-09-28 4:17 PM, Neil Bothwick <neil@××××××××××.uk> wrote: |
2 |
> On Sat, 28 Sep 2013 19:04:41 +0000, Alan Mackenzie wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
>>> I suppose that what I am about to say isn't really relevant, but it is |
5 |
>>> unfortunate over the past year that people blamed udev specifically |
6 |
>>> for this. It is true that it does things that don't work if /usr isn't |
7 |
>>> mounted, but eudev does as well, since it is basically the same code. |
8 |
>> |
9 |
>> Who else is there to blame? We are continually being told that a |
10 |
>> separate /usr is "broken", as though this were some unfortunate act of |
11 |
>> <insert your deity here>, much like an earthquake. This gets |
12 |
>> patronising really quickly. (Please note, I'm NOT blaming you here. I |
13 |
>> appreciate that you're as much victim as Dale or me or anyone else |
14 |
>> round here.) |
15 |
> |
16 |
> It's evolution. Linux has for years been moving in this direction, now it |
17 |
> has reached the point where the Gentoo devs can no longer devote the |
18 |
> increasing time needed to support what has now become an dge case. |
19 |
|
20 |
So the solution is to give users one MONTH to prepare? Why not 6 months, |
21 |
or better, a year? What for gods sake is the rush??? |
22 |
|
23 |
Where are the links/pointers to the INTERNAL discussions of this |
24 |
decision? I seriously want to know. If gentoo devs are not willing to |
25 |
provide a 'paper trail' for how this decision was arrived at, and let |
26 |
others judge their decisions based on the merits of their arguments, |
27 |
then what does that say about their true motivations/intentions? |
28 |
|
29 |
Again, I don't have a problem necessarily with what is being decided (no |
30 |
separate /usr without an initramfs), my problem is with the |
31 |
implementation - giving us one MONTH before we can expect possible |
32 |
breakage with each and every update. |
33 |
|
34 |
The other HUGE thing that worries me, and has me seriously considering |
35 |
switching to FreeBSD NOW, is, maybe there really is a secret, underlying |
36 |
ulterior motive to force both systemd AND an initramfs for everyone in |
37 |
ALL use cases. If that is the case, then say so now, and give those of |
38 |
us who do not want this advanced notice, and I'll just plan on setting |
39 |
my gentoo box to never update on Nov 1, and start working on learning |
40 |
FreeBSD and if necessary, pay someone to help me migrate services to it. |
41 |
|
42 |
But before I do that, I guess due diligence demands that I now go to the |
43 |
FreeBSD support lists/forums (whatever they use) to confirm that FreeBSD |
44 |
does NOT and never WILL require an initramfs (preferably the reason |
45 |
being architectural differences in the kernel itself). Thankfully they |
46 |
have their own init system, so no worrying about systemd invading |
47 |
there... I hope... |