The Linux kernel also supports far more architectures than we do. That does not mean that we must support them too.
With that said, how does changing things benefit/affect users, especially non-systemd users? On Oct 14, 2013, at 9:36 AM, Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote: > Dnia 2013-10-14, o godz. 09:26:43 > Richard Yao <r...@gentoo.org> napisał(a): > >> On Oct 14, 2013, at 9:19 AM, Rich Freeman <ri...@gentoo.org> wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Oct 14, 2013 at 7:59 AM, Ben de Groot <yng...@gentoo.org> wrote: >>>> I don't see a compelling case being made for why we should make this >>>> change apart from "all the other distros are doing it", and quite a >>>> few reasons why we shouldn't. I'm open to being convinced, so please >>>> tell me why this is good for Gentoo users. >>> >>> So far I've seen a reference to a bug associated with a bunch of >>> systemd issues when it isn't mounted, and the point that many things >>> break in namespaces without the symlink, since /etc/mtab does not >>> reflect the state of the namespace. The latter in particular seems >>> like a pretty fundamental limitation - the very concept of /etc/mtab >>> is that mounts are global, and the design of linux is that mounts are >>> NOT global. >> >> Why should this not be treated as a systemd bug? > > Is it a Linux kernel bug that it supports mount namespaces? Since > userspace clearly wasn't designed for that 20 years ago, so Linux > clearly has a bug supporting that! > > -- > Best regards, > Michał Górny
