On Wed, 2011-09-14 at 14:55 -0400, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 2:36 PM, Dale <rdalek1...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> >>
> >> On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 1:52 AM, Joost Roeleveld<jo...@antarean.org>
> >>  wrote:
> >>>
> >>> On Tuesday, September 13, 2011 06:33:01 PM Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> On Tue, Sep 13, 2011 at 6:10 PM, Michael Schreckenbauer<grim...@gmx.de>
> >>>
> >>> wrote:
...
> 
> Who actually speaks on the list. As far as we know, maybe the only
> Gentoo users disagreeing with the changes are the ones saying so on
> the list. We don't know.
> 
...


ok, as one of the silent ones on this topic so far, I'll chime in.

Dont assume that the silent majority are in favour - they just might be
on the other side.  Perhaps others who disagree can say "me too" in
order to support Dale who has been carrying the argument very well.

>From my point of view, its looking like I will have to redesign a number
of systems to take this into a/c, expose those systems to a proven
higher risk of failure* all because of some corner cases that dont apply
to me or the majority and perhaps the biggest point is that I have no
choice in the matter, and possibly no choice about when it will happen.

I wonder if going back to a static /dev is still possible.  Server
hardware doesnt change much once in service so its a once only hit to
set it up.

I dont mind that you want to use systemd and an initramfs - but I dont,
and I dont want to be forced to go along with you.

BillK

* my biggest failure when doing sys admin tasks at a workplace involved
initrd's - now I do not use them on gentoo (I dont have a choice on the
ubuntu systems), and guess what ... Ive never had an initrd failure on
gentoo since :)  I know initramfs isnt initrd, but the exposure is the
same.





Reply via email to