Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Optional /usr merge in Gentoo

[J. Roeleveld]

On Mon, August 19, 2013 23:24, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On 19/08/2013 16:33, pk wrote:
>> Using an initramfs means you duplicate parts of your OS and copy them
>> into the kernel or using a tool (like dracut or genkernel). If you need
>> it from a technical point of view (bluetooth keyboard), that's fine but
>> if I don't have any hardware that requires it then why use an initramfs?
>> I guess it's a matter of taste (or "philosophy" if you will)... An
>> initramfs seems like bandaid to me (and it is).
>
>
> I snipped most of the thread as I don't want to revisit yet again and
> old horse that is much flogged already :-)
>
> We're not too different, you and I, if I may dare say it when we differ
> it's you tend a little more towards idealism and I towards realism.
>
> Yes, bluetooth sucks, but it was designed by what was available at the
> time and it's what we have. For that matter USB, spinning disks and lack
> of fibre into my house also suck, but we have to work with what we have
> and what we certainly will have soon.

I could have had fibre into my house, but the rest of the neighbourhood
didn't want to sign a petition to have it installed.
The petition only stated the intent to subscribe. It didn't specify that
signatories would be required to actually subscribe.
And that is with quite a few IT-people in the area.
But that is a different rant ;)

> Which brings me to what I am really trying to say - giving specific
> examples to highlight general problems is always a nasty road to
> navigate. Like bluetooth keyboards, there's always a non-trivial number
> who can claim that the example does not apply to *them*. One can go
> round and round in circles with that, and skirt the actual issue:

What happened to wireless USB?
Bluetooth is nice for mobile phones and in-car audio/handsfree systems.
I also don't see the point of using it for keyboards.
How would I enter the pincode to link the keyboard to the computer if the
keyboard has not been linked yet? ;)

> Software exists in the context of something bigger and for us that often
> means "maximally useful for the maximum number of folks inclined to use
> such a package" and that sweet spot includes compromises; some things
> just have to be laid in stone so that everything else works at all -
> sometimes we just have to accept that.
>
> Let's look at /usr by comparing it to /opt. I like /opt - all the crap
> from Oracle, IBM, Sybase and Sun my managers shove on me goes in there
> where I can at least corral it. I can agree with that setup.

You can scratch Sun from that list, it's Oracle now...
They do have some interesting software, part of it pays for the bills.
I agree with putting that in /opt, wouldn't want to mess up the base OS
with that stuff.
Some admins install that into /home/.../, btw.

> Like I said earlier, software exists in the context of something bigger,
> and Gentoo exists in the context of the FOSS community. We consume much
> more code than we produce and sometimes we have to back down and go with
> what the world is doing or be prepared to fork.
>
> Incidentally, I don't see that anyone has ever proposed the obvious
> sword to cut this knot - have the kernel automount /usr. it already does
> / and we have root= ... it wouldn't be hard to add /usr= ...
>
> Yes, I know I'm being stupid and Linus would reply with two words, the
> first starting with an f. He'd tell us to solve it the right way even if
> that's the hard way. I believe separate /usr without initramfs is
> rapidly becoming white elephant material, and we are faced with a
> decision to do it the hard way.

If Linus would go for that, how long till there would be a /var, /home,
/... in there?
Maybe an "fstab=/path/to/fstab" would be a better option? And then make
sure that file is on the root-partition?

--
Joost