Walter Dnes wrote: > On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 06:15:03PM -0400, Mike Edenfield wrote > >> Every machine I run Linux on is a huge desktop system running behemoth >> software (Eclipse, GNOME, Chromium, LibreOffice, etc.). > > I have Abiword, Gimp, Gnumeric, Firefox, etc, running just fine, thank > you, on ICEWM. > >> He seems to be producing a rather vitriolic, and IMO uncalled-for, >> rant against the simple fact that computers do more stuff in 2012 than >> they did in 1972 and the udev developers are changing with the times. > >> This argument falls flat when the author fails to identify what >> he or she considers to be critical vs. non-critical software. Is >> bluetoothd critical? On my laptop it is not. On my main development >> workstation it is not. On my wife's desktop it is because she has >> a Bluetooth keyboard/mouse combination. Should bluetoothd be moved >> from /usr/sbin to /sbin? Along with libglib and libdbus, which it >> depends on? How about usbmuxd, or alsactl? > > *YOUR WIFE'S LAPTOP* won't boot properly without /usr on /, or an > initramfs. OK, put /usr on /, or an initramfs *ON YOUR WIFE'S LAPTOP*. > I don't have a problem with that. What gets people really upset is the > dog-in-the-manger attitude of "if my complex/corner-case machine won't > boot up without /usr on /, or an initramfs, then by golly *NOBODY'S* > machine will be allowed to boot up without /usr on /, or an initramfs". > My machine does not use bluetooth/other-weird-stuff. udev doesn't need > to find bluetooth drivers on /usr on my machine. Why is udev being > deliberately broken to not work on *EVERYBODY'S* machine if they don't > have /usr on /, or an initramfs? >
This has been one of my points too. I could go out and buy me a bluetooth mouse/keyboard but I don't because it to complicates matters. Does my BIOS see these devices so that I can access BIOS, you know, press del to enter setup. I have a desktop computer but I use PS/2 connections. Why? It always works even with the BIOS and grub. I might also add, if my keyboard gets further away than my keyboard cable, I can't exactly use the computer since I can't see the monitor any more, not and read anything anyway. I may end up with a init thingy, which I am currently using. Thing is, the first time it breaks and I can't fix it, I'll install something else. I chose Gentoo because I could build a system that has a SIMPLE boot process. Turn on power, BIOS does it's thing, grub loads and I make a selection, kernel loads, init starts. Now, I have one more item that has broken for me before when I had a initfs based distro. If I have to have a init thingy, why use Gentoo? It was one reason I left Mandrake and chose Gentoo. Actually, it was a HUGE reason. I don't want to count the number of times I would try to boot my system and the init thingy fail to work. Thing is, it is MUCH easier and faster to install Kubuntu than it is Gentoo and Kubuntu takes care of the init thingy itself. If it breaks, just reinstall. Reinstalling Gentoo takes way to long for that to be a option. Back to my hole. Dale :-) :-) -- I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words! Miss the compile output? Hint: EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--quiet-build=n"
