| 1 |
On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 6:10 PM, Michael Schreckenbauer <grimlog@×××.de> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tuesday, 13. September 2011 17:53:04 Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 5:30 PM, Michael Schreckenbauer <grimlog@×××.de> |
| 4 |
> wrote: |
| 5 |
>> > There are already devs on "our" side. Fortunatly one of them maintains |
| 6 |
>> > openrc> |
| 7 |
>> > :) |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> I really don't see them as "sides". "We" are not at "war". |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> :) |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
>> And if |
| 14 |
>> OpenRC is capable of booting without needing an initramfs, I really, |
| 15 |
>> truly believe that is *GREAT*. But |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
>> a) It doesn't stop OpenRC to actually use an initramfs |
| 18 |
>> b) Doesn't mean every other part of the stack will keep working |
| 19 |
>> without an initramfs *AND* with a separated /usr. |
| 20 |
>> c) Doesn't mean there are enough developers to keep supporting the |
| 21 |
>> things upstream stop supporting. |
| 22 |
>> |
| 23 |
>> Again, it all comes down to whoever writes the code. If Vapier wants |
| 24 |
>> to support OpenRC for systems without initramfs and a separated /usr, |
| 25 |
>> that's amazing and we should all said thanks to him and the other devs |
| 26 |
>> for the extra effort. But it *WILL* be extra effort for him the moment |
| 27 |
>> more upstreams choose to assume that either /usr is in /, or that the |
| 28 |
>> system boots with an initramfs. |
| 29 |
>> |
| 30 |
>> We can thank Vapier, but we cannot *demand* of him to support whatever |
| 31 |
>> we want. Nor to any other dev. |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
> I do not demand anything from any developer (unless I pay him). |
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
>> So,if you *TRULY* believe that Gentoo should forever and ever support |
| 36 |
>> any setup it has supported up until now, better start coding. Because |
| 37 |
>> otherwise you can never be sure somebody else will do it for you. |
| 38 |
> |
| 39 |
> Not that it has some value for this discussion, but I *do* code. It's just not |
| 40 |
> udev, openrc or as a gentoo-dev. |
| 41 |
|
| 42 |
Me too. That's why I put so much value on the people that writes the code. |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
> If gentoo follows fedora on this mandatory initramfs trail, I'll switch to |
| 45 |
> FreeBSD completely. My software works on way more systems than just "Linux". |
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
That's of course your prerogative. And, as I said before: "Linux |
| 48 |
strives to be much more than Unix, and that means do things |
| 49 |
differently." If you want to do things the same way that it was done |
| 50 |
in the last 20 years, maybe Linux is not the best of choices. |
| 51 |
|
| 52 |
I myself think the new technologies are worth to change the way we did |
| 53 |
things before. But that's just me. |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
>> And maybe I shouldn't even mention it, but I don't use OpenRC. I use |
| 56 |
>> systemd. And it works great on Gentoo. |
| 57 |
> |
| 58 |
> Well. Linux only. If I wanted a monoculture, I would use MS-Windows or OSX. |
| 59 |
|
| 60 |
Relax man. I mention what I use: I'm not forcing you (or anybody else) |
| 61 |
to use it. But I repeat (because I said it before) that I care about |
| 62 |
Linux, and Linux only. |
| 63 |
|
| 64 |
But that's just me. |
| 65 |
|
| 66 |
Regards. |
| 67 |
-- |
| 68 |
Canek Peláez Valdés |
| 69 |
Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación |
| 70 |
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México |
Archives