On Wednesday, 7 August 2019 01:31:03 BST Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 6, 2019 at 7:41 PM Grant Taylor
> > Sadly, I think people have thrust additional (IMHO) largely unnecessary
> > complexity into the init process just to be able to support more exotic
> > installations.
I may be wrong bu
On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 20:37:44 -0600, Grant Taylor wrote:
> Actually, the quote in the first forum post you linked to has the
> following:
>
> /sbin->usr/bin
> /usr/sbin->bin
>
> That takes four directories (/bin, /sbin, /usr/bin, /usr/sbin) and
> combines them into two (/sbin & /usr/bin and /bin
On Wednesday, 7 August 2019 11:48:09 BST Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Mon, 5 Aug 2019 20:37:44 -0600, Grant Taylor wrote:
> > Actually, the quote in the first forum post you linked to has the
> > following:
> >
> > /sbin->usr/bin
> > /usr/sbin->bin
> >
> > That takes four directories (/bin, /sbin, /
On Wed, 07 Aug 2019 11:58:52 +0100, Mick wrote:
> > Actually, it combines them all into one. The second link is to bin,
> > not /bin. It's a relative link from /usr/sbin so this would put
> > everything in /usr/bin.
>
> Yep! It sounds like an amazing idea! I vote we rename it $WINDOWS/
As op
On Wednesday, 7 August 2019 12:48:08 BST Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Wed, 07 Aug 2019 11:58:52 +0100, Mick wrote:
> > > Actually, it combines them all into one. The second link is to bin,
> > > not /bin. It's a relative link from /usr/sbin so this would put
> > > everything in /usr/bin.
> >
> > Yep!
On 8/6/19 6:31 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
So, an initramfs doesn't actually have to do ANY of those things,
though typically it does.
I agree that most systems don't /need/ an initramfs / initrd to do that
for them. IMHO /most/ systems should be able to do that for themselves.
Nothing prevents
6 matches
Mail list logo
