On Fri, 01 Jan 2016 21:47:57 +0100
Micky Del Favero <micky@???> wrote:

> Steve Litt <slitt@???> writes:
>
> > This *is* poetterization, regardless of what Sun or anyone else did
> > before. It's supported by Freedesktop.org, and I think everyone here
> > can agree that anything Freedesktop supports is anti-init choice,
> > anti-simplicity, anti-modularity, and pro-systemd.
>
> So anything freedesktop.org supports is a bad idea a priori only
> because freedesktop.org supports systemd even if the same idea
> somebody else has years ago before systemd?

Yes. That would be my first presumption, and it would take a heck of a
lot of proof to convince me otherwise. Judging Freedesktop.Org by
several years of nearly consistent behavior in complexifying software,
I'd say a reasonable person would agree with me.

> For me this is a religion war drives by the same forma mentis of
> poettering's: "#notabug #wontfix because it works for me".
>
> > Hey, I'll be the first to admit that sometimes you need an
> > initramfs. Maybe you have LUKS plus LVM plus software raid. Merge
> > or not, you'll need to compile yourself one heck of a kernel to
> > avoid needing initramfs. But for the very prevalent use case of
> > Ext4, no raid, no LVM, no LUKS, no silly merge, and a few
> > partitions, initramfs is as
>
> Againg you're acting as poettering: if I've a system like yours with
> ext4, without any raid or lvm or luks I can boot my system without
> initramfs, if I have a different setup I'm a heretic man to be
> converted.

Whoaaaa, an ad homonym followed by a misstatement of my words. Read the
paragraph you're responding to: I said *a lot* of people could benefit
from no initramfs, not *everyone* could benefit from it. It's that
nagging little choice thing again: I'd like the user to have a choice,
but the merge makes such choice almost impossible.

>
> Will Devuan become the universal operating system that Debian pre
> systemd was or it'll only be the opposite of Debian?
>
> All my servers disks are formatted with xfs, on a lvm lv over raid
> volume, all my computers disks are formatted xfs, on some computer I
> also have luks volumes.
>
> I can recompile the kernel so all needed modules are static compiled
> in kernel, and all users that want a different setup than ext4 without
> raid, lvm, luks or whatever, is it really what we want forcing users
> to recompile kernels on a machine like yours to be able to boot their
> boxes only because you don't like initramfs?

Read my words again. I did not call for the banishment of initramfs
from Devuan.

>
> Maybe merging /bin in /usr/bin isn't a good idea, maybe it's, I cannot
> see any problem merging /bin in /usr/bin, Solaris made it many yars
> ago and it hasn't systemd and overall it runs without problem due to
> merging, I also think that using initramfs is possible also having
> separate direcroty for /usr and /usr/bin, as it's now.
>
> > Initramfs does have one big benefit for the Poetterists: It
> > provides a dark, safe place for them to start up their
> > megacomplexities and call it magic. Oh, there are tools with which
> > you can periscope into initramfs, but have you ever really looked
> > at everything in an initramfs? It's a jungle in there. Just right
> > for the Poetterists to incubate their plague.
>
> years ago i've built a cluster of diskless servers that network booted
> using a initramfs filesystem, it's not so obscure, I admit it wasn't
> trivial to made the initramfs, but was simpler than you can think.

None of which contradicts the paragraph to which you're responding. And
I'm pretty sure your initramfs, which if I read right you made
yourself, was *a lot* simpler than the initramfs systems that come with
systemd encumbered distros.

SteveT

Steve Litt 
November 2015 featured book: Troubleshooting Techniques
     of the Successful Technologist
http://www.troubleshooters.com/techniques