Marc Schiffbauer posted on Wed, 04 Jan 2012 21:45:35 +0100 as excerpted:
> Please remember that there are *way* more server systems running linux
> without any graphical desktop at all than desktop systems.
So with Google activating ~800k android Linux systems a day last I heard,
how do the numb
Jeroen Roovers wrote:
On Sun, 01 Jan 2012 16:49:42 -0500
Olivier Crête wrote:
That's why you have dracut to do it for you.
Which is keyworded at this point. Stable users do what?
It's keyworded for only two arches.
And amd64 is one of them. I'd say it is a fairly popular arch too. ;-)
* Olivier Crête schrieb am 04.01.12 um 22:55 Uhr:
> On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 21:45 +0100, Marc Schiffbauer wrote:
> >
> > > That said, in the new systemd world, bash is.. Since it's only a
> > "UI"
> > > tools (just like gnome-shell for example). Since you don't need it
> > to
> > > boot.
> >
> > Ye
On Sun, 01 Jan 2012 16:49:42 -0500
Olivier Crête wrote:
> > > That's why you have dracut to do it for you.
> > Which is keyworded at this point. Stable users do what?
It's keyworded for only two arches.
> This is a discussion about the future... Changing keywords is trivial
> if we care.
Oh,
On 01/04/2012 09:32 AM, Olivier Crête wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 18:12 +0100, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>>> On Wed, 4 Jan 2012, Michał Górny wrote:
>>
What mistakes?
>>
>>> The mistake of introducing a pointless separation based on a rule of
>>> thumb which becomes more and more blurry ove
On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 21:45 +0100, Marc Schiffbauer wrote:
>
> > That said, in the new systemd world, bash is.. Since it's only a
> "UI"
> > tools (just like gnome-shell for example). Since you don't need it
> to
> > boot.
>
> Yeah right. Having dbus for bluetooth is much more important than
> ha
* Olivier Crête schrieb am 04.01.12 um 19:53 Uhr:
> On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 19:30 +0100, Marc Schiffbauer wrote:
> > * Olivier Crête schrieb am 04.01.12 um 18:40 Uhr:
> > > On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 15:54 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 16:51:12 +0100
> > > > Michał Górny wrote:
On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 07:26:05PM +0100, Marc Schiffbauer wrote:
> For example, to make that FHS definition be reality there are (can
> be) runlevels that will only boot a system with all basic stuff
> required to mount the rootfs and make root being able to login to
> the local text console. Thes
On 04-01-2012 20:26:27 +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
> We use hacks to move shared libraries to rootfs, and then create one
> more hack to not confuse the linker with different locations of static
> and shared libraries.
So your point is that the reasons why this was originally done are now
no longer
On 04-01-2012 20:28:01 +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
> > > And a compiler. If I mess up some important system component, I'd
> > > really use one. And package manager. And backup system libraries...
> >
> > Time for your PXE boot from net to just bring back a sane image or so.
>
> My PXE boot from n
On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 20:00:51 +0100
Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 04-01-2012 19:50:24 +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
> > On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 18:12:18 +0100
> > Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> >
> > > > On Wed, 4 Jan 2012, Michał Górny wrote:
> > >
> > > >> What mistakes?
> > >
> > > > The mistake of introd
On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 19:48:03 +0100
Thomas Sachau wrote:
> Defining a prefix is no "hack", it is an option you can use.
>
> Anyway, we both have probably enough packages with such a "hack"
> installed, but i cannot find a single file in /lib/pkgconfig, not even
> that dir does exist. Is it differ
On 04-01-2012 13:51:26 -0500, Olivier Crête wrote:
> No no no, the idea is that once all binaries are in /usr, you can easily
> share /usr between different systems and do updates in a sane way.. You
> can also mount /usr read-only, but still have / be read-write.
http://article.gmane.org/gmane.li
On 04-01-2012 19:50:24 +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 18:12:18 +0100
> Ulrich Mueller wrote:
>
> > > On Wed, 4 Jan 2012, Michał Górny wrote:
> >
> > >> What mistakes?
> >
> > > The mistake of introducing a pointless separation based on a rule of
> > > thumb which becomes mo
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 1:27 PM, Kent Fredric wrote:
> Given that these tools are being moved to /usr and/or duplicated to in
> initrd , what is the point of a root filesystem anyway now? Just to
> mount other things on? Just to store /etc ?
>
> Or will /etc move to /usr too?
I'd recommend reading
On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 19:30 +0100, Marc Schiffbauer wrote:
> * Olivier Crête schrieb am 04.01.12 um 18:40 Uhr:
> > On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 15:54 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > > On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 16:51:12 +0100
> > > Michał Górny wrote:
> > > > /bin/systemctl
> > > > libdbus-1.so.3 => /u
On Thu, 2012-01-05 at 07:27 +1300, Kent Fredric wrote:
> 2012/1/5 Ulrich Mueller
> >
> > > On Wed, 4 Jan 2012, Michał Górny wrote:
> >>
> > There's really nothing pointless or blurry about this separation.
> > The FHS has a nice definition: "The contents of the root filesystem
> > must be adeq
On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 18:12:18 +0100
Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > On Wed, 4 Jan 2012, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> >> What mistakes?
>
> > The mistake of introducing a pointless separation based on a rule of
> > thumb which becomes more and more blurry over time, and hacking
> > packages just to make
Michał Górny schrieb:
> On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 13:06:11 +0100
> Thomas Sachau wrote:
>
>> Michał Górny schrieb:
>>> On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 01:47:38 +0100
>>> Thomas Sachau wrote:
>>>
2. switching from udev to mdev (avoids required /usr of udev)
3. some wrapper script to mount /usr before ude
On Thu, 5 Jan 2012 07:27:49 +1300
Kent Fredric wrote:
> 2012/1/5 Ulrich Mueller
> >
> > > On Wed, 4 Jan 2012, Michał Górny wrote:
> >>
> > There's really nothing pointless or blurry about this separation.
> > The FHS has a nice definition: "The contents of the root filesystem
> > must be ade
* Olivier Crête schrieb am 04.01.12 um 18:40 Uhr:
> On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 15:54 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 16:51:12 +0100
> > Michał Górny wrote:
> > > /bin/systemctl
> > > libdbus-1.so.3 => /usr/lib64/libdbus-1.so.3
> >
> > Here is a prime example of why "vertical int
2012/1/5 Ulrich Mueller
>
> > On Wed, 4 Jan 2012, Michał Górny wrote:
>>
> There's really nothing pointless or blurry about this separation.
> The FHS has a nice definition: "The contents of the root filesystem
> must be adequate to boot, restore, recover, and/or repair the system."
>
Given t
* Olivier Crête schrieb am 04.01.12 um 18:32 Uhr:
> On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 18:12 +0100, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > > On Wed, 4 Jan 2012, Michał Górny wrote:
> >
> > >> What mistakes?
> >
> > > The mistake of introducing a pointless separation based on a rule of
> > > thumb which becomes more an
On Wed, Jan 04, 2012 at 03:19:57PM +, Steven J Long wrote:
> I could swear we were told in prior discussions on this list that a separate
> /usr partition is not considered supported by upstream udev, but searching
> all I can find is that an initramfs is required.[1]
The upstream statement w
On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 12:40:10 -0500
Olivier Crête wrote:
> On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 15:54 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> > On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 16:51:12 +0100
> > Michał Górny wrote:
> > > /bin/systemctl
> > > libdbus-1.so.3 => /usr/lib64/libdbus-1.so.3
> >
> > Here is a prime example of why "verti
On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 15:54 +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 16:51:12 +0100
> Michał Górny wrote:
> > /bin/systemctl
> > libdbus-1.so.3 => /usr/lib64/libdbus-1.so.3
>
> Here is a prime example of why "vertical integration" should really be
> called "a horrible mess of tight
On Wed, 2012-01-04 at 18:12 +0100, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > On Wed, 4 Jan 2012, Michał Górny wrote:
>
> >> What mistakes?
>
> > The mistake of introducing a pointless separation based on a rule of
> > thumb which becomes more and more blurry over time, and hacking
> > packages just to make i
> On Wed, 4 Jan 2012, Michał Górny wrote:
>> What mistakes?
> The mistake of introducing a pointless separation based on a rule of
> thumb which becomes more and more blurry over time, and hacking
> packages just to make it work.
There's really nothing pointless or blurry about this separati
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 9:03 PM, Mikko C. wrote:
> Hi,
> for me removing esound causes Thunderbird to not play sounds anymore.
> Related bug is https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=378155
> Also googling for "esound + thunderbird" yields quite a few results related
> to this.
The bug is qu
On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 17:33:15 +0100
Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 04-01-2012 16:37:34 +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
> > > And this part was not about the movement to /usr at all, so why
> > > do you suggest another movement here? And while you answer that,
> > > please also tell us, why you want to migra
On 04-01-2012 16:37:34 +0100, Michał Górny wrote:
> > And this part was not about the movement to /usr at all, so why do you
> > suggest another movement here? And while you answer that, please also
> > tell us, why you want to migrate packages to a different install
> > location without a need.
>
On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 15:54:07 +
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 16:51:12 +0100
> Michał Górny wrote:
> > /bin/systemctl
> > libdbus-1.so.3 => /usr/lib64/libdbus-1.so.3
Considering that I really thought about stripping that one because
otherwise people will not even notice the
On Wed, 4 Jan 2012 16:51:12 +0100
Michał Górny wrote:
> /bin/systemctl
> libdbus-1.so.3 => /usr/lib64/libdbus-1.so.3
Here is a prime example of why "vertical integration" should really be
called "a horrible mess of tight coupling"...
Remember how people used to make fun of Windows when it
On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 13:50:45 +
Steven J Long wrote:
> (Additionally I'd say that binaries installed to /bin that require
> libraries installed to /usr is a bug, but something that should be
> dealt with separately. Though with the direction people seem to think
> is needed, I'm not sure how m
On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 13:06:11 +0100
Thomas Sachau wrote:
> Michał Górny schrieb:
> > On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 01:47:38 +0100
> > Thomas Sachau wrote:
> >
> >> 2. switching from udev to mdev (avoids required /usr of udev)
> >> 3. some wrapper script to mount /usr before udev starts
> >
> > These two
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 10:19 AM, Steven J Long
wrote:
> I was under the impression that anyone using lvm+raid (+luks) on root
> already has an initramfs, and there are docs out there about that, but sure,
> improving those docs and the software is always a good idea.
Anybody running root on lvm+r
Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 8:50 AM, Steven J Long
> wrote:
>> The thing I don't understand is why it is necessary to move stuff from
>> /bin to /usr/bin. After all, if you're running the "approved" setup you
>> don't have a separate /usr so all the binaries are available from th
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 8:50 AM, Steven J Long
wrote:
> The thing I don't understand is why it is necessary to move stuff from /bin
> to /usr/bin. After all, if you're running the "approved" setup you don't
> have a separate /usr so all the binaries are available from the get-go.
Where is this app
Michał Górny wrote:
> On Sun, 1 Jan 2012 08:53:26 +
> Sven Vermeulen wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 07:59:47PM -0600, William Hubbs wrote:
>> > The goal is to deprecate /bin, /lib, /sbin and /usr/sbin. My
>> > understanding is that they want to move software that is installed
>> > in /b
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 6:43 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 7:58 AM, Arun Raghavan wrote:
>> Does mdev support all the rules we have in /lib/udev/rules.d/? The
>> Internet is surprisingly mute on this subject, but a quick grep
>> through the busybox source doesn't turn up anythin
On Wed, Jan 4, 2012 at 7:58 AM, Arun Raghavan wrote:
> Does mdev support all the rules we have in /lib/udev/rules.d/? The
> Internet is surprisingly mute on this subject, but a quick grep
> through the busybox source doesn't turn up anything that suggests that
> it might.
I think the main use cas
On 3 January 2012 15:21, Walter Dnes wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 31, 2011 at 07:59:47PM -0600, William Hubbs wrote
>
>> I see three options:
>>
>> 1) Start migrating packages along with upstream and have everyone who
>> has a separate /usr (including me by the way) start using an initramfs
>> of some kin
Michał Górny schrieb:
> On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 01:47:38 +0100
> Thomas Sachau wrote:
>
>> 2. switching from udev to mdev (avoids required /usr of udev)
>> 3. some wrapper script to mount /usr before udev starts
>
> These two should be really discouraged as a cheap, temporary solution.
> We should n
El mié, 04-01-2012 a las 09:12 +0530, Arun Raghavan escribió:
> On 4 January 2012 06:48, Nirbheek Chauhan wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > Today, I was shocked to find that the EsounD daemon is still in the
> > tree and new ebuilds are actually still pulling it in under USE=esd!
> >
> > Proposal: pack
# Ralph Sennhauser (04 Jan 2012)
# Outdated Java version, fails to fetch, no upstream. #228929
# Removal in 30 days.
dev-java/jrockit-jdk-bin
The 03/01/12, G.Wolfe Woodbury wrote:
> The problem is that one group of developers is ignoring years of history
> and purpose in the separation of /bin and /usr/bin and the ability of
> having a separate /usr. This is in the udev development team and they
> /deliberately/ placed or used some pro
On Wed, 04 Jan 2012 01:47:38 +0100
Thomas Sachau wrote:
> 2. switching from udev to mdev (avoids required /usr of udev)
> 3. some wrapper script to mount /usr before udev starts
These two should be really discouraged as a cheap, temporary solution.
We should not support hate-admining. I personal
47 matches
Mail list logo
