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? -- Walter Dnes <waltd...@waltdnes.org>
