| 1 |
On 2012-12-24, Michael Mol wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On Mon, Dec 24, 2012 at 10:06 AM, Nuno J. Silva <nunojsilva@×××××××.pt> wrote: |
| 4 |
>> On 2012-12-24, Dale wrote: |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
[...] |
| 7 |
>>> From my understanding, if I upgrade my system to the later version of |
| 8 |
>>> udev and bypass the init system, my system will not boot. I have not |
| 9 |
>>> tested the theory but that is what people have been saying. Not only is |
| 10 |
>>> my /usr separate but it is on LVM partitons too. |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
>> Your problem would be LVM (if that's an issue at all, as I said I don't |
| 13 |
>> know LVM), you'd not need udevd to mount /usr if it were a regular |
| 14 |
>> partition. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> "you wouldn't have this problem if you did *something else*" is a |
| 17 |
> terrible response. There are very good reasons to use LVM. There are |
| 18 |
> good (IMO, at least) reasons to avoid using an initr* on Gentoo. |
| 19 |
> (Those reasons are sprinkled through the thread, some spoken by me, |
| 20 |
> some spoken by others.) |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
A shame that was not what I meant at all, the only thing I said was |
| 23 |
"yes, the problem is probably caused by it being on LVM, not because of |
| 24 |
/usr being separate". Just pointing the specific part of Dale's config |
| 25 |
that would be the problem. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
> You'll find most of the people in the discussion so far aren't against |
| 28 |
> initr* in all cases. It's the increase in number of cases where it |
| 29 |
> becomes technically required that's a problem. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
Nuno Silva (aka njsg) |
| 33 |
http://njsg.sdf-eu.org/ |
Archives