On Fri, 2020-05-08 at 09:59 -0400, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Fri, May 8, 2020 at 7:03 AM Martin Wilck <Martin.Wilck@suse.com> wrote:
On Fri, 2020-05-08 at 10:27 +0200, Michal Kubecek wrote:
IMHO an important point is that such fallout still could be justified if the change fixed an actual problem affecting users or improved the distribution for users in a significant way. I don't see either in the reasoning (for the rename) provided so far.
I fully agree. Daniel has put forward two arguments:
1. formally correct naming of the files, 2. removal of SUSE-specific patches.
Wrt 1.) I'd say it's an academic argument, irrelevant and not worth giving a single thought, if it's clear that the name change will cause real problems for real people.
2.) is a different issue. The negative effect of ongoing maintenance efforts shouldn't be underestimated. However, in this particular case I don't see a real problem. AFAICS the current dracut code base contains only two related commits:
1442c9d Fix initramfs-$ver.img vs initrd-$ver in dracut-initramfs- restore.sh 16f2179 Adjust initramfs-$kernel.img to SUSE default: initrd- $kernel
These amount to 8 deleted and 6 added code lines in total. I dare say that that's also not worth even the slightest risk of causing regressions for anyone.
@Daniel, please correct me if I have overlooked something important.
This delta has knock-on effects, too:
* It makes it difficult for third-party software to detect and recognize our initramfs.
I understand the argument in general. Even small differences between distributions may be cumbersome to handle for 3rd parties. However, it's really not that hard in this specific case, is it?
* It is confusing as the documentation on the internet about this makes it hard for people to trust openSUSE's software is doing the right thing
I'd like to see evidence for that - mistrust in a distro, based on the choice of a file name? Actually, I don't believe that users are seriously confused. Who cares about the format? For novice users, all this goes on behind the scenes. Others understand that these are the files to be put on the "initrd" line in grub.cfg(*). More experienced users grok that these are images containing an early user space for the kernel for bootstrapping the OS. But only two entities are truly concerned with the file format, one is the kernel, and the other one is dracut itself.
Also, someone upthread mentioned Debian. Debian uses upstream naming in dracut mode, and uses their own naming with initramfs-tools. This has been that way for a few releases of Debian now.
I don't see what this implies for openSUSE. From the ISV PoV, I'd expect that supporting these two "modes" in Debian/Ubuntu, or initramfs-tools in general, would be a much bigger pain point than openSUSE's choice of the file name.
I personally was bitten by the delta in SUSE distributions when doing work as an ISV trying to support SUSE distributions. I want to make it easier for others to support SUSE distributions, so I really welcome this change.
Sorry to hear you had trouble, but saving ISVs some (relatively small) effort isn't worth breaking users' systems, IMO. Regards Martin (*) grub uses the word "initrd": https://www.gnu.org/software/grub/manual/grub/html_node/initrd.html It even calls that file "initial ramdisk". If we want to be consistent and avoid confusing anybody, that ought to be changed as well... -- Dr. Martin Wilck <mwilck@suse.com>, Tel. +49 (0)911 74053 2107 SUSE Software Solutions Germany GmbH HRB 36809, AG Nürnberg GF: Felix Imendörffer -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org