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.
