1 |
On Mon, 30 Sep 2013 00:14:08 -0400, Walter Dnes wrote: |
2 |
|
3 |
> > seperate /usr has stopped working fine AGES AGO. Just some setups were |
4 |
> > lucky enough not to stumble over the wreckage and fall into the |
5 |
> > shards. |
6 |
> |
7 |
> I.e. the 99% who don't need initramfs before today. Some corner case |
8 |
> exotic setups require complex solutions... no ifs/ands/ors/buts. All |
9 |
> the complaining you hear is from the other 99% who's setup worked just |
10 |
> fine with the simple solution, suddenly finding the complex solution |
11 |
> rammed down their throats. |
12 |
|
13 |
Separate /usr is broken, maybe "faulty" would be a better word. It's like |
14 |
software bugs, not everyone hits every bug, if you don't use the buggy |
15 |
bits of the program. But would you rather wait until the program stopped |
16 |
working for you or have the bugs fixed before you ever saw them? |
17 |
|
18 |
Also consider that this is about Gentoo support for separate /usr. They |
19 |
are supporting it now, which means they are spending time on it that |
20 |
could be devoted elsewhere. Their spending that time on it may well be |
21 |
the reason you have been shielded from the problems caused by a |
22 |
separate /usr. All the news item says is that the Gentoo devs are no |
23 |
longer going to do that for you, and they have presented a couple of |
24 |
solutions. You are free to find a third path, or even continue using a |
25 |
separate /usr without initramfs in the hope or belief that it will not |
26 |
break for you. |
27 |
|
28 |
|
29 |
-- |
30 |
Neil Bothwick |
31 |
|
32 |
You are about to give someone a piece of your mind, |
33 |
something you can ill afford... |