On Fri, Jan 06, 2012 at 08:35:32AM -0500, Rich Freeman wrote: > On Thu, Jan 5, 2012 at 5:36 PM, Alex Alexander <wi...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > If people are really interested in keeping a tight, self contained root, > > we need to: > > > > - establish a [tight] list of software we consider critical for / > > - fix/patch software in that list so it can run without /usr there > > - create /bin => /usr/bin/ symlinks for above software (simplifies > > things if packages start hardcoding /usr/bin here and there) > > - move everything else in /usr/bin/ > > You're missing one thing: > > - establish a list of all the configurations that will actually work > with this self-contained root > > I think this is why there is so much disagreement over whether this is > a good move. If you have a really simple configuration, then the > self-contained root concept works reasonably well (though apparently > we'll have to heavily patch newer versions of udev or abandon it to > sustain this). > > However, if you have a very complex configuration the current > self-contained root is already broken and you need an initramfs > anyway. For in-between cases things might work now but that is likely > to change as upstream moves on. > > The binary distros don't have users tweaking their kernels and init > scripts, so they basically have to design for worst-case. Gentoo can > get away with designing for more of an average case since we just tell > anybody with a complex case to go read a howto and configure what is > necessary (and we like to do that stuff anyway). > > We can choose not to like it, but it sounds like maintaining a > self-contained root for even the typical case will become untenable. > Those who argue that having /usr on a separate partition simply > shouldn't be supported are basically just saying that our > "self-contained root" should include everything in /usr which seems to > defeat the whole point of a "self-contained root" anyway. > > It seems to me that the most reasonable approach is to not force the > issue, but not deviate greatly from upstream either. That means > accepting that over time the rootfs will become less and less capable > of working on its own, and immediately improving tools like dracut to > overcome these limitations. Users who can get away with it can avoid > using an initramfs, at least for a time. > > Sure, it is all open source, and Gentoo can swim upstream if we REALLY > want to. However, this only works if developers are willing to spend > the time constantly fixing upstream's tools. It sounds to me like the > maintainers of packages like udev/systemd/etc want to actually move in > the same direction as upstream so in practice I don't see that > happening. > > Now, Gentoo is about choice, so one thing we should try to do as much > as possible is understand the limitations of the various > configurations and make it clear to users when they do and don't need > an initramfs. To be honest, tight coupling worries me more than the > /usr move, since that has a lot more potential to constrain the > choices we can offer our users (which is a great deal of the value > that Gentoo offers). I understand its advantages, but it seems > somewhat contrary to "the unix way."
That's why I wrote "tight list". I do not expect the self-contained root to be able to handle everything /usr (or a complete initramfs) would. What it could and couldn't do is something that needs to be decided, but some work is already done there - it's just a bit messy and incomplete and because most people don't care it keeps getting worse. The important thing here is to make a clear definition of where we draw the line and make sure things work the way we want them to. I agree with you in that at some point patching may become too time consuming, but I still believe that if we do this properly, with a well-defined plan and list of packages we want to keep in / (with symlinks to be compatible with whatever others are trying to do), we won't be alone in this. Gentoo may be one of the most hardcore power-user distros out there, but we're certainly not the only one. Now, if only we had people interested enough in doing this... :) -- Alex Alexander | wired + Gentoo Linux Developer ++ www.linuxized.com
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
