Re: [gentoo-user] udev + /usr

[Dale]

Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 11:02 AM, Alan Mackenzie<acm@×××.de>  wrote:
>> Hi, everybody.
>>
>> Hope nobody minds me starting a new thread with an accurate name.
>>
>> Which version of udev is it that has this nauseating feature of needing
>> /usr loaded to boot?
>>
>> Somewhere in that version's source will be several (or lots of) "/usr".
>> Just how difficult is it going to be to replace "/usr/bin" with "/bin"
>> throughout the source?
>>
>> udev is part of the kernel.  How come the kernel hackers aren't up in
>> arms about this as much as we are?  Or are they, maybe?  In which case,
>> maybe the kernel people would welcome an option to disrequire the early
>> mounting of /usr as much as we would.
>>
>> Anyhow, I'd like to take a peek at the source code which does this evil
>> thing.  Would somebody please tell me which version of udev is involved.
>>
>> Thanks.
> (This would be my only post in this new thread: I think I have made my
> point of view clear in the other thread).
>
> I have seen a lot of disinformation going on in the other threads
> (like some people suggesting that /var would not be able to be on its
> own partition at some point in the future). Just before everyone start
> to wildy conjecture, please take a look at this:
>
> http://www.freedesktop.org/wiki/Software/systemd/separate-usr-is-broken
>
> Also, a look at this thread is maybe justified:
>
> http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.sysutils.systemd.devel/1728/
>
> Both things are in the context of systemd, but it's related to the
> discussion at hand. I know not everybody wants to use systemd, and
> think Lennart and Kay are the root of all that is wrong and evil on
> the world, but I will recommend everyone interested in the reasons of
> the push for a recommended initramfs to take a look at the page in
> fd.org, and the thread in the systemd mailing list. Even if you don't
> agree with the reasoning, it is worth to take a look at it.
>
> As for me, I would say one last time my POV: Linux strives to be much
> more than Unix, and that means do things differently. It will always
> be capable of do anything that Unix does, and most of the time it will
> do it better. But that doesn't (necessarily) means that it will do it
> in the same way.
>
> And many of us don't take "but my config/setup/partition works now" as
> a valid argument to restrain progress.
>
> Change happens.
>
> Regards everyone.

You say it was disinformation about /var.  Care to explain why me and 
one other person read the same thing?  It was mentioned on -dev.  I was 
pretty sure it was and then another person posted they read the same.  
So, I'm almost certain it was said at this point.  Surely we can't both 
be wrong.

Dale

:-)  :-)