FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Gentoo > Gentoo Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 03-14-2012, 11:40 AM
Joshua Kinard
 
Default Let's redesign the entire filesystem!

On 03/14/2012 04:39, Duncan wrote:

>
> THAT is why they're moving /bin, /sbin and /lib to /usr rather than the
> other direction. rootfs will be ONLY a mountpoint, with even /etc/ being
> bind-mounted from /usr/etc, and all system data unified on /usr,
> including /etc.
>
> Viewed from that perspective, the direction of the "unification",
> everything formerly on rootfs moving to /usr, so rootfs' only function is
> providing the mountpoints for everything else, has a certain logic to
> it...


From one perspective, this makes sense. It actually is a kinda of holy
grail for administrators, because it's one less filesystem to worry about
backing up.


> And they don't care about non-initr* based systems any more than they
> care about non-Linux systems or for that matter, non-systemd Linux
> systems. That's outside their operational universe. Other people are
> welcome to continue working with "legacy" systems if they want, but Linux-
> only, systemd-based, initr*-based systems are the only thing they're
> interested in supporting, themselves.


You know, I would have no problem with this if it wasn't a decision made by
a single Linux distro with a huge amount of clout in the Linux world. This
isn't like Debian forking Firefox into Ice Weasel, an issue that largely
remains Debian-specific to this day. This is a change that will
fundamentally alter the way every distro does things, and none of us (as far
as I know) were given a choice in the matter.

The /usr move is going to happen. I, along with a lot of other people, are
going to have to "fix" all my installed systems over this. Not because of a
choice made by all distros, but because one distro thinks that its way is
the RightWay() and the OnlyWay().

That's what I disagree with. We shouldn't be affected by this change. Only
Fedora users should have to deal with it. But other upstream projects are
going to follow in Fedora's lead, and this brings us up to a decision point:
adapt, or become irrelevant.

I chose to stick with Gentoo as my distro of choice because I didn't like
the way Red Hat did things years ago. As well as a few other nitpicks I
have. It bugs me to no end that, despite running a fairly vanilla setup on
a source-based distro whose original inspiration came from BSD ports, I am
still affected by a decision made by RH.

--
Joshua Kinard
Gentoo/MIPS
kumba@gentoo.org
4096R/D25D95E3 2011-03-28

"The past tempts us, the present confuses us, the future frightens us. And
our lives slip away, moment by moment, lost in that vast, terrible in-between."

--Emperor Turhan, Centauri Republic
 
Old 03-14-2012, 01:41 PM
Greg KH
 
Default Let's redesign the entire filesystem!

On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 08:40:46AM -0400, Joshua Kinard wrote:
> I chose to stick with Gentoo as my distro of choice because I didn't like
> the way Red Hat did things years ago. As well as a few other nitpicks I
> have. It bugs me to no end that, despite running a fairly vanilla setup on
> a source-based distro whose original inspiration came from BSD ports, I am
> still affected by a decision made by RH.

It is not a decision made by RH, some of the developers involved just
happen to work for that distro. Others of us do not. Please don't get
this confused with distro specific politics, it's not that at all.

And again, if you have /usr on a different filesystem today, with no
initrd, your machine could be broken and you don't even know it.

greg "why is this thread still alive" k-h
 
Old 03-14-2012, 01:51 PM
Philip Webb
 
Default Let's redesign the entire filesystem!

120314 Greg KH wrote:
> if you have /usr on a different filesystem today, with no initrd,
> your machine could be broken and you don't even know it.

Whatever do you mean ? -- if it were truly broken,
it wouldn't perform in some important & obvious respect.
Do you mean "insecure" ? -- if so, what is the threat ?

> greg "why is this thread still alive" k-h

Your dismissive response is perhaps one reason ...

--
========================,,======================== ====================
SUPPORT ___________//___, Philip Webb
ELECTRIC /] [] [] [] [] []| Cities Centre, University of Toronto
TRANSIT `-O----------O---' purslowatchassdotutorontodotca
 
Old 03-14-2012, 02:04 PM
Greg KH
 
Default Let's redesign the entire filesystem!

On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 10:51:44AM -0400, Philip Webb wrote:
> 120314 Greg KH wrote:
> > if you have /usr on a different filesystem today, with no initrd,
> > your machine could be broken and you don't even know it.
>
> Whatever do you mean ? -- if it were truly broken,
> it wouldn't perform in some important & obvious respect.

Not always, no, it isn't obvious that something didn't start up
correctly, or that it didn't fully load properly. Some programs later
on recover and handle things better.

> Do you mean "insecure" ? -- if so, what is the threat ?

No threat.

> > greg "why is this thread still alive" k-h
>
> Your dismissive response is perhaps one reason ...

Given that this is the first time I've responded to this thread in
weeks, I doubt it. People like to complain, that's nothing new, I
should be used to it by now, so perhaps it is all my fault...

greg k-h
 
Old 03-14-2012, 02:08 PM
Ciaran McCreesh
 
Default Let's redesign the entire filesystem!

On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 08:04:31 -0700
Greg KH <gregkh@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Not always, no, it isn't obvious that something didn't start up
> correctly, or that it didn't fully load properly. Some programs later
> on recover and handle things better.

So why not work on fixing those things, since they're clearly symptoms
of a larger "oops, we have too much coupling" problem, instead of
forcing a workaround onto large numbers of users?

--
Ciaran McCreesh
 
Old 03-14-2012, 02:22 PM
Greg KH
 
Default Let's redesign the entire filesystem!

On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 03:08:27PM +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 08:04:31 -0700
> Greg KH <gregkh@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > Not always, no, it isn't obvious that something didn't start up
> > correctly, or that it didn't fully load properly. Some programs later
> > on recover and handle things better.
>
> So why not work on fixing those things, since they're clearly symptoms
> of a larger "oops, we have too much coupling" problem, instead of
> forcing a workaround onto large numbers of users?

I seriously doubt there are a "large number" of users here that have
this issue.

And even if there is, again, there is a simple solution that Gentoo
provides for this issue, see the earlier initrd solution that we support
today.

As for "fixing this", see the oft-linked webpage as to why it can't be
fixed easily, if at all, and honestly, I don't think it needs to be
fixed.

Especially as NO ONE has ever stepped up to fix these issues, which
proves that no one is really invested in it.

As for "too much coupling", you are talking to the wrong person.
Personally, I feel we are too lightly coupled, and need to have stronger
links happening here in order to properly solve the problems that we
have in this area.

If you disagree with the coupling issue, fine, but again, you need to do
the work, and properly understand the issues involved. The people doing
the work today do understand them, by virtue of doing the work involved,
which gives them the say in how it is done. That's how open source
works, why is this ever a surprise to people?

I'll go back to lurking now, and getting stuff done, like everyone else
on this thread should be doing, instead of complaining (this is -dev,
not -users...)

greg k-h
 
Old 03-14-2012, 02:59 PM
Ciaran McCreesh
 
Default Let's redesign the entire filesystem!

On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 08:22:09 -0700
Greg KH <gregkh@gentoo.org> wrote:
> The people doing the work today do understand them, by virtue of
> doing the work involved, which gives them the say in how it is done.
> That's how open source works, why is this ever a surprise to people?

The problem is that when a small number of people who have commit
access to core projects screw everything up and don't fix the mess
they're inflicting upon everyone, the only option left with "how open
source works" is for someone to fork the code from the point where it
all worked. That isn't something that should be done lightly.

--
Ciaran McCreesh
 
Old 03-14-2012, 03:28 PM
Matthew Summers
 
Default Let's redesign the entire filesystem!

On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 10:22 AM, Greg KH <gregkh@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 03:08:27PM +0000, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
>> On Wed, 14 Mar 2012 08:04:31 -0700
>> Greg KH <gregkh@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> > Not always, no, it isn't obvious that something didn't start up
>> > correctly, or that it didn't fully load properly. *Some programs later
>> > on recover and handle things better.
>>
>> So why not work on fixing those things, since they're clearly symptoms
>> of a larger "oops, we have too much coupling" problem, instead of
>> forcing a workaround onto large numbers of users?
>
> I seriously doubt there are a "large number" of users here that have
> this issue.
>

The majority of users should not encounter any difficulty due to this
issue. Those that are doing special things that require careful
mounting, etc should be sufficiently competent to deal with this issue
without any trouble at all, especially given the various solution
paths.

> And even if there is, again, there is a simple solution that Gentoo
> provides for this issue, see the earlier initrd solution that we support
> today.
>

Gentoo provides a solution with genkernel, dracut provides a solution,
even the linux kernel itself provides a solution (in my view the
easiest solution at that).

> I'll go back to lurking now, and getting stuff done, like everyone else
> on this thread should be doing, instead of complaining (this is -dev,
> not -users...)
>
> greg k-h
>

Oh, please Greg, do continue to stay engaged, I enjoy your perspective
very much.

I just wanted to drop this simple fact in there. This has been coming
for several years now AND the linux kernel has been using an initramfs
for every boot, every time for a long time now, all 2.6 and up as I
understand it. If the initramfs is empty, well the kernel is smart
enough to fall back on "legacy" boot process.

If you care to read about it, its all contained locally if your kernel
source in the file
linux/Documentation/filesystems/ramfs-rootfs-initramfs.txt

Its a great read, sure to entertain and enlighten. It saved my bacon a
few times when mdadm switched to the new metadata format. Once I began
to learn about what the initramfs made possible, entire new worlds of
possibility appeared (and I was not even on drugs!).

It's actually something of a surprise to me that there are people
upset about this change, since it cleans things up a bit while also
giving people that want and/or need it, a great deal of power and
control over the boot process that was not nearly as easy before.

I do believe Gentoo, as a community/volunteer-run and super-power-user
distribution, should be careful, a bit wary, and seriously consider
the decisions made by our corporate colleagues (we do have the mandate
to maintain our independence). However, simply because RHEL, SUSE, etc
are corporation controlled distributions does not mean they are bad or
trying to control/ruin the rest of the distros.

Anyway, I merely thought I would place my commentary on this situation
here for posterity. Since I have an opinion, I thought I would share
it for better or worse.

--
Matthew W. Summers
Gentoo Foundation Inc.
 
Old 03-14-2012, 04:11 PM
Maxim Kammerer
 
Default Let's redesign the entire filesystem!

On Wed, Mar 14, 2012 at 17:22, Greg KH <gregkh@gentoo.org> wrote:
> As for "fixing this", see the oft-linked webpage as to why it can't be
> fixed easily, if at all, and honestly, I don't think it needs to be
> fixed.

What's wrong with:
* having an "early mounts" list file
* having an "early modules" list file
* init system in early boot (e.g., OpenRC in init.sh) loading "early
modules" and mounting "early mounts" from /etc/fstab

This will solve the issue with most non-complex (i.e., no raid or
encryption) initramfs-less setups, without requiring that users
migrate to initramfs (e.g., after dealing with genkernel-generated
scripts for a long time, I wouldn't touch it with a pointed stick
anymore). The relevant files can be also generated automatically
during an upgrade (empty "early modules" and empty or /usr-only "early
mounts", depending on /etc/fstab contents).

--
Maxim Kammerer
Liberté Linux (discussion / support: http://dee.su/liberte-contribute)
 
Old 03-14-2012, 04:29 PM
Zac Medico
 
Default Let's redesign the entire filesystem!

On 03/14/2012 10:11 AM, Maxim Kammerer wrote:
> What's wrong with:
> * having an "early mounts" list file
> * having an "early modules" list file
> * init system in early boot (e.g., OpenRC in init.sh) loading "early
> modules" and mounting "early mounts" from /etc/fstab

You're assuming that the /sbin/init hasn't migrated to /usr/sbin/init.
Other that that, it sounds like a perfect solution if you're in the "I'd
rather die than use an initramfs" camp.
--
Thanks,
Zac
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 01:41 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org