| 1 |
On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: |
| 3 |
>> |
| 4 |
>> On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 1:52 AM, Joost Roeleveld<joost@××××××××.org> |
| 5 |
>> wrote: |
| 6 |
>>> |
| 7 |
>>> On Tuesday, September 13, 2011 06:33:01 PM Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: |
| 8 |
>>>> |
| 9 |
>>>> On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 6:10 PM, Michael Schreckenbauer<grimlog@×××.de> |
| 10 |
>>> |
| 11 |
>>> wrote: |
| 12 |
>>>>> |
| 13 |
>>>>> If gentoo follows fedora on this mandatory initramfs trail, I'll switch |
| 14 |
>>>>> to FreeBSD completely. My software works on way more systems than just |
| 15 |
>>>>> "Linux". |
| 16 |
>>>> |
| 17 |
>>>> That's of course your prerogative. And, as I said before: "Linux |
| 18 |
>>>> strives to be much more than Unix, and that means do things |
| 19 |
>>>> differently." If you want to do things the same way that it was done |
| 20 |
>>>> in the last 20 years, maybe Linux is not the best of choices. |
| 21 |
>>> |
| 22 |
>>> I read it before, but to be much more then Unix, Linux should be doing |
| 23 |
>>> things |
| 24 |
>>> better. Being different is what led to MS Windows' |
| 25 |
>> |
| 26 |
>> But that's the thing: we (you and me) don't see the situation the same |
| 27 |
>> way. To me, the proposed changes are for the better. |
| 28 |
> |
| 29 |
> You are one of very few that feel this way. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Who actually speaks on the list. As far as we know, maybe the only |
| 32 |
Gentoo users disagreeing with the changes are the ones saying so on |
| 33 |
the list. We don't know. |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
>>>> I myself think the new technologies are worth to change the way we did |
| 36 |
>>>> things before. But that's just me. |
| 37 |
>>> |
| 38 |
>>> The new technologies have great merit. But, the implementation of it |
| 39 |
>>> isn't |
| 40 |
>>> thought through. |
| 41 |
>> |
| 42 |
>> In my humble opinion, what you just said is a little pedantic. You can |
| 43 |
>> disagree with the proposed changes, you can argue why you think |
| 44 |
>> another approach could be better. But just saying "the implementation |
| 45 |
>> of it isn't thought through", is a little insulting to the devs. I |
| 46 |
>> think they though about the implementation a lot. |
| 47 |
> |
| 48 |
> The dev only thought about himself and the distro he uses. |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
That's one of the many things you don't get, Dale. It's not one dev. |
| 51 |
It's not one distro. And that's the principal reason why I thing the |
| 52 |
change willl indeed happen. |
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
> He apparently |
| 55 |
> didn't consider how what he is doing is going to affect others or he would |
| 56 |
> have done something better. People have already explained what should be |
| 57 |
> done so there is a better way to do this without breaking things. |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
That people say things you agree with, doesn't necessarily means they |
| 60 |
are right. Like Sebastian said, the thread goes in circles, so I will |
| 61 |
not repeat my reasons for not agreeing: but be assured that many |
| 62 |
people don't agree with your reasoning, and that several Gentoo devs |
| 63 |
agree with the change. And they are working as we speak to implement |
| 64 |
it. |
| 65 |
|
| 66 |
Other devs do not agree, but again, code talks. At the end of the day, |
| 67 |
the ones writing the code will have their way. |
| 68 |
|
| 69 |
>>>>>> And maybe I shouldn't even mention it, but I don't use OpenRC. I use |
| 70 |
>>>>>> systemd. And it works great on Gentoo. |
| 71 |
>>>>> |
| 72 |
>>>>> Well. Linux only. If I wanted a monoculture, I would use MS-Windows or |
| 73 |
>>>>> OSX. |
| 74 |
>>>> |
| 75 |
>>>> Relax man. I mention what I use: I'm not forcing you (or anybody else) |
| 76 |
>>>> to use it. But I repeat (because I said it before) that I care about |
| 77 |
>>>> Linux, and Linux only. |
| 78 |
>>> |
| 79 |
>>> If you care about Linux, why do you allow it to be broken in such a |
| 80 |
>>> fundamental way? |
| 81 |
>> |
| 82 |
>> Again, to me is not "breaking it". To me is "improving it". |
| 83 |
>> |
| 84 |
>> Regards. |
| 85 |
> |
| 86 |
> It is breaking it. Why you can't see that is beyond me. |
| 87 |
|
| 88 |
Because, thanks to evolution, people have the ability (and liberty) to |
| 89 |
think differently. |
| 90 |
|
| 91 |
> It has already |
| 92 |
> been said what is supposed to be required for booting and /usr and possibly |
| 93 |
> /var is not on the list. |
| 94 |
|
| 95 |
I have heard many ideas of "what is supposed to be required" for many |
| 96 |
things. I haven't heard of anyone willing to implement most of those |
| 97 |
great ideas. I have only heard from the Gentoo devs working in |
| 98 |
following upstreams, and from the devs in said upstreams. |
| 99 |
|
| 100 |
As long as nobody is willing to implement it (and maintain it, and |
| 101 |
debug it, and support it), no "solution" is worth the bits used to |
| 102 |
express it. |
| 103 |
|
| 104 |
Regards. |
| 105 |
-- |
| 106 |
Canek Peláez Valdés |
| 107 |
Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación |
| 108 |
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México |
Archives