| 1 |
On Sat 20 August 2011 14:29:15 Mick did opine thusly: |
| 2 |
> On Saturday 20 Aug 2011 13:59:42 David W Noon wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On Sat, 20 Aug 2011 03:48:18 -0500, Dale wrote about "Re: |
| 4 |
> > [gentoo-user] /dev/sda* missing at boot": |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > [snip] |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> > >I wish you could convince the devs of that. I already have |
| 9 |
> > >/var on its own and was planning to put /usr on its own. I'm |
| 10 |
> > >not now tho. Looks like /, /boot, /home and that's it for the |
| 11 |
> > >OS part. It downright sucks. |
| 12 |
> > |
| 13 |
> > I have also been following the discussion on gentoo-dev, |
| 14 |
> > although I currently only lurk there. I was going to register |
| 15 |
> > and post with a suggestion that everything should be on the |
| 16 |
> > root partition; that way we could rename it C: and be compliant |
| 17 |
> > with the "industry standard". |
| 18 |
> > |
| 19 |
> > However, it gets worse: one cannot safely fsck a partition or |
| 20 |
> > logical volume once it has been mounted. As things currently |
| 21 |
> > stand, there are no statically linked fsck modules for |
| 22 |
> > ext2/3/4, as static linkage was dropped from e2fsprogs about 3 |
| 23 |
> > years ago. This means for fsck to run inside an initramfs or |
| 24 |
> > intrd, the image will have to contain glibc, libpthread and a |
| 25 |
> > whole slew of other large libraries in order to run e2fsck with |
| 26 |
> > dynamic linkage. The initramfs will end up being *many* times |
| 27 |
> > larger than the kernel itself. [On my systems, the vmlinuz file |
| 28 |
> > is only about 1.8 megs, and glibc alone makes that look really |
| 29 |
> > puny.] |
| 30 |
> > |
| 31 |
> > Welcome to progress. |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
> This is madness. Is there anything we can do to stop it? |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Fork. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
-- |
| 39 |
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com |
Archives