[Mageia-dev] Please test: initscripts+systemd in updates_testing

Mon Oct 31 18:06:00 CET 2011

Michael Scherer skrev 31.10.2011 18:07:
+> Le dimanche 30 octobre 2011 à 14:19 +0200, Thomas Backlund a écrit :
+>>
+>> I'm saying moving the stuff that is _really_ needed, not based on "udev
+>> might run"...
+>>
+>> well, thinking some more on it I guess the real design flaw (not systemd
+>> specific) is using all of udev in init. Init should not care about more
+>> than getting disc access (and probably network for pxe  boots)
+>
+> That's the point that Lennart make, ie :
+> "we used to have / to mount all partition and /usr to be mounted, now,
+> we have initramfs to mount /, and then / to mount /usr, so it would be
+> simpler to merge / and /usr"
+>
+
+-ENOTCONVINCED
+
+So why merge / and /usr and kill a usable feature?
+
+Just have initramfs mount / and /usr, no need to merge.
+
+
+> So that's simple. For stuff needed for initial boot, we have initrd, for
+> the rest, that's /usr/
+>
+> http://www.spinics.net/lists/fedora-devel/msg158642.html
+>
+
+-ESTILLNOTCONVINCED
+
+
+>> Then we wouldn't have to worry about "what udev might run" and could
+>> keep a very clean /
+>>
+>>>> Well, it _is_ idiotic if it breaks working setups / possibilities to
+>>>> finetune systems.
+>>>
+>>> It depends on your definition of "working". Sure if you specifically
+>>> work around the know limitations of the design then you may get a
+>>> bootable system, which you could classify as working, but I wouldn't say
+>>> this is a robust base. Just a house of cards waiting for the next
+>>> failure. I'd rather try and address the problems properly and be frank
+>>> about it in the discussions.
+>>>
+>>
+>> Well, it has worked 24/7 for servers for atleast last 15 years for
+>> servers I maintain, so I'd say that is pretty robust.
+>
+> That's also what people say about manually compiling software in
+> solaris, and I think they are wrong, so that's not really a compeling
+> argument to my eyes.
+
+Yeah, well that's your opinion.
+
+> In fact "using packages prevent me from finetuning my software" is also
+> a common and recuring theme from the same people ( well, slightly less
+> recuring nowadays as I didn't meet people telling me so since gentoo and
+> slackware usage slightly dropped ).
+>
+> We have unix server since 1970, that doesn't mean the assumption that
+> lead to some design decision are not open to be revisited.
+
+I dont mind people revisiting design decisions, but breaking working 
+setups sucks bigtime.
+
+But I guess that's the development trend nowdays: "I cant be bothered to 
+fix things properly so I just call it "depreceated"... and go ahead
+and break things just as I like"
+
+Oh well, I guess it's time to start blacklisting some rpms to ensure
+things keep working as they are intended.
+
+--
+Thomas
+