On Tuesday, 13. September 2011 17:53:04 Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: > On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 5:30 PM, Michael Schreckenbauer <grim...@gmx.de> wrote: > > There are already devs on "our" side. Fortunatly one of them maintains > > openrc> > > :) > > I really don't see them as "sides". "We" are not at "war".
:) > And if > OpenRC is capable of booting without needing an initramfs, I really, > truly believe that is *GREAT*. But > > a) It doesn't stop OpenRC to actually use an initramfs > b) Doesn't mean every other part of the stack will keep working > without an initramfs *AND* with a separated /usr. > c) Doesn't mean there are enough developers to keep supporting the > things upstream stop supporting. > > Again, it all comes down to whoever writes the code. If Vapier wants > to support OpenRC for systems without initramfs and a separated /usr, > that's amazing and we should all said thanks to him and the other devs > for the extra effort. But it *WILL* be extra effort for him the moment > more upstreams choose to assume that either /usr is in /, or that the > system boots with an initramfs. > > We can thank Vapier, but we cannot *demand* of him to support whatever > we want. Nor to any other dev. I do not demand anything from any developer (unless I pay him). > So,if you *TRULY* believe that Gentoo should forever and ever support > any setup it has supported up until now, better start coding. Because > otherwise you can never be sure somebody else will do it for you. Not that it has some value for this discussion, but I *do* code. It's just not udev, openrc or as a gentoo-dev. If gentoo follows fedora on this mandatory initramfs trail, I'll switch to FreeBSD completely. My software works on way more systems than just "Linux". > And maybe I shouldn't even mention it, but I don't use OpenRC. I use > systemd. And it works great on Gentoo. Well. Linux only. If I wanted a monoculture, I would use MS-Windows or OSX. > Regards. Regards, Michael
