On Fri, 01 Jan 2016 21:47:57 +0100 Micky Del Favero <mi...@mesina.net> wrote:
> Steve Litt <sl...@troubleshooters.com> writes: > > > This *is* poetterization, regardless of what Sun or anyone else did > > before. It's supported by Freedesktop.org, and I think everyone here > > can agree that anything Freedesktop supports is anti-init choice, > > anti-simplicity, anti-modularity, and pro-systemd. > > So anything freedesktop.org supports is a bad idea a priori only > because freedesktop.org supports systemd even if the same idea > somebody else has years ago before systemd? Yes. That would be my first presumption, and it would take a heck of a lot of proof to convince me otherwise. Judging Freedesktop.Org by several years of nearly consistent behavior in complexifying software, I'd say a reasonable person would agree with me. > For me this is a religion war drives by the same forma mentis of > poettering's: "#notabug #wontfix because it works for me". > > > Hey, I'll be the first to admit that sometimes you need an > > initramfs. Maybe you have LUKS plus LVM plus software raid. Merge > > or not, you'll need to compile yourself one heck of a kernel to > > avoid needing initramfs. But for the very prevalent use case of > > Ext4, no raid, no LVM, no LUKS, no silly merge, and a few > > partitions, initramfs is as > > Againg you're acting as poettering: if I've a system like yours with > ext4, without any raid or lvm or luks I can boot my system without > initramfs, if I have a different setup I'm a heretic man to be > converted. Whoaaaa, an ad homonym followed by a misstatement of my words. Read the paragraph you're responding to: I said *a lot* of people could benefit from no initramfs, not *everyone* could benefit from it. It's that nagging little choice thing again: I'd like the user to have a choice, but the merge makes such choice almost impossible. > > Will Devuan become the universal operating system that Debian pre > systemd was or it'll only be the opposite of Debian? > > All my servers disks are formatted with xfs, on a lvm lv over raid > volume, all my computers disks are formatted xfs, on some computer I > also have luks volumes. > > I can recompile the kernel so all needed modules are static compiled > in kernel, and all users that want a different setup than ext4 without > raid, lvm, luks or whatever, is it really what we want forcing users > to recompile kernels on a machine like yours to be able to boot their > boxes only because you don't like initramfs? Read my words again. I did not call for the banishment of initramfs from Devuan. > > Maybe merging /bin in /usr/bin isn't a good idea, maybe it's, I cannot > see any problem merging /bin in /usr/bin, Solaris made it many yars > ago and it hasn't systemd and overall it runs without problem due to > merging, I also think that using initramfs is possible also having > separate direcroty for /usr and /usr/bin, as it's now. > > > Initramfs does have one big benefit for the Poetterists: It > > provides a dark, safe place for them to start up their > > megacomplexities and call it magic. Oh, there are tools with which > > you can periscope into initramfs, but have you ever really looked > > at everything in an initramfs? It's a jungle in there. Just right > > for the Poetterists to incubate their plague. > > years ago i've built a cluster of diskless servers that network booted > using a initramfs filesystem, it's not so obscure, I admit it wasn't > trivial to made the initramfs, but was simpler than you can think. None of which contradicts the paragraph to which you're responding. And I'm pretty sure your initramfs, which if I read right you made yourself, was *a lot* simpler than the initramfs systems that come with systemd encumbered distros. SteveT Steve Litt November 2015 featured book: Troubleshooting Techniques of the Successful Technologist http://www.troubleshooters.com/techniques _______________________________________________ Dng mailing list Dng@lists.dyne.org https://mailinglists.dyne.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/dng