| 1 |
On 2013-08-18 10:55 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés <caneko@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> And, putting aside systemd and getting back on topic to the council's |
| 3 |
> decision of (eventually) not supporting separated /usr without an |
| 4 |
> initramfs; have you ever stopped to consider that, perhaps, that's the |
| 5 |
> best *technical* decision? (*gasp*) |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
That is *not* the concern here, Canek, and that should be obvious from |
| 8 |
the comments here. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Repeat: the primary concern is *not* about separate /usr without initramfs. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
The primary concern is that systemd will eventually be shoved down our |
| 13 |
throats whether we want it or not, and using eudev or mdev or |
| 14 |
*anything* other than systemd (ie OpenRC/eudev) will. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
And the track record speaks for itself, regardless of *any* promises |
| 17 |
that it won't, it is obvious to anyone with eyes to see and ears to hear |
| 18 |
that this is a blatant LIE. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Everything that is happening is simply setting the stage for precisely that. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
> When you have almost all distributions converging on that, and even |
| 23 |
> *the OpenRC maintainer* (which is the one pushing this, BTW, not the |
| 24 |
> systemd guys) supporting that decision, don't you think that perhaps, |
| 25 |
> just*perhaps*, everybody screaming about the sky falling (which, BTW, |
| 26 |
> they are certainly noisy, but I really don't think are that many) are |
| 27 |
> overreacting and even (*gasp* again) wrong? |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Again, the main issue is not about separate /usr, so please stop trying |
| 30 |
to deflect the subject... |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
In my opinion, the single largest reason to *not* switch to systemd in |
| 33 |
gentoo is the source of the push - in other words, it is coming from |
| 34 |
Fedora - and GNOME lovers are the maintainers. |
Archives