On 11/14/2012 4:19 PM, Linda Walsh wrote:
Andreas Jaeger wrote:
This kind of discussion style does not bring us anywhere, let's end the thread,
---- What type of discussion style do you want, in order to proceed to fix this problem... or is your intent just to stop the fixing of the problem?
I don't like your accusation style.
you were the one who opened with "lets end the thread", indicating no willingness to engage in any type of discussion.
I responded with a question about what discussion style you wanted in in order to proceed with fixing the problem, (i.e. since you indicated your desire to end the thread was based on the style, perhaps a different style would work -- and I offered), or, I asked, was it merely your intent to end the discussion and no style would work.
That wasn't an accusation -- it was a question for clarification of how to proceed that would suite you -- OR to clarify that you really didn't care to proceed in any manner, and your intent was just to shut me up.
Labeling my offer 'accusatory', paints you in a bit of a bad light. It indicates you aren't willing to discuss things and this isn't OPEN anything.
It was and *still is( your choice to respond in a positive way. It's a choice... which I am giving, instead of accusing. That the choice might feel accusatory if you were already closed on the subject an your only mission is to silence me OR you might have misinterpreted my honest attempt at making it a choice. I don't need to do any work to fix it, I can simply send you the spec files for 12.1 and be done with it. Case solved. Now the question becomes, would you accept such a fix? Are you open to it being fixed?
So I can ask you again .. what works?
Btw. I'm not considering that openSUSE needs to support mounting of /usr with initrd.
It's your attitude that /usr must be on the same partition as root in order for it to boot -- whether it is on a ram disk or on a physical disk is immaterial.
I was told systemd no longer required this. This is the third time I ask -- is this not the case?
If this is a request for you, then support it yourself. openSUSE comes with an initrd and we assume that it's there...
You are breaking 40 years of backward compatibility with absolutely no concerns. You think this is only my issue?
You think a slow booting system is only my concern?
There were quite a few people who spoke up against this -- and likely the only reason most of them aren't respond (maybe 1 other) is that they have either given up on SuSE as becoming MS's plaything, or given up on Suse being responsive to "the community[sic]"... which is increasingly appearing to be a joke.
That describes me. These changes break my real world operations and my ability to effectively admin my systems, but complaining about that only results in personal attacks and disregard. They could have developed all these new plans off to the side and gotten them to the point where they worked and provided all the same flexibility and features we already have, and included ways to avoid breaking backwards compatibility and standard unix expectations, and only moved them into the official system after the new ways were of that level of quality. I would not have minded that. Give me a systemd that doesn't break anything old, and I won't even notice that you swapped it in. Then let me discover all the new possibilities it offers at my discretion instead of forcing this breakage on me, and forcing me to have to halt all new installs at 11.4 or 12.1 while I scramble to either migrate to some other system or figure out how hard it would be to maintain sysv init all by myself on newer opensuse, or maybe switch to sles and buy (literally) a little time that way (even though I don't like sles but it's less broken than newer opensuse). You're not allowed to say you have a problem with these things as higher level engineering decisions that are just wrong in principle for many, countless, reasons. And you're not allowed to say you have a problem with these things for specific reasons either, because the answer is just "you're doing something weird that we don't support". Most of what you're saying is just common sense rational engineering and I agree completely. But I mostly stopped complaining once I realized exactly what you said. It's pointless. The kids want to play with their toys and they don't care about any scenarios they themselves don't happen to suffer, and are no good at imagining situations they haven't had themselves directly, and do not see any value in flexibility and the concept of unix as a tool box of small efficient distinct purpose low level tools that you assemble as needed into any kind of system you may need. They don't understand what a key core foundation principle that is, or how all other goodness flows from that. Unix, including linux, is supposed to be an alphabet, a tool box, and an engine, not a black box product. Apple and MS already sell black box products and they are a fine for some people. But I want better and that's why I use unix, in the form of opensuse currently. If opensuse wants to target the same kind of desktop user that Windows and OSX currently serve, that is their right. It just sucks for us because it means it's no longer an efficient system to base servers on. I don't mean efficient in cpu terms at run-time. I mean for me the admin and architect, and for my employer and customers getting good results out of me and what I can do for them. (It's not efficient for them that I have to spend time fighting against tools that used to be reliable and transparent, but now are fragile and opaque.) Since much of the rest of the linux market is doing the same thing, I too am revisiting my old choice to use linux instead of bsd back when we switched off of SCO. I'm not sure what I'll do eventually but I do not thank the opensuse developer collective for forcing me into a scramble. I already have a busy busy job. I did NOT need this. It's a ton of work to figure out if I can switch to systemd (probably I can but there are other problems besides systemd, some of which are only here because of systemd though), if I can maintain sysv init on new versions of opensuse almost all by myself, if I can work around plymouth and grub gfxboot and KMS on serial console-only boxes _reliably_, if I can switch entirely to centos, or redhat, or something even more different like gentoo or arch or debian, or if I can buy a little time by switching to SLES, or switch to freebsd... There are pros and cons to all of those and they take a lot of time and work even just to work out how feasible they are to even begin to make a choice. What I can't do is stay arrested at 11.4 or 12.1 too much longer because unlike the old days, everyone always needs to stay up on security updates even if they don't actually want any other new features. No I do not thank them for putting me in this position. And I am not highly motivated to be a helpful contributor when complaints of this nature are so disregarded, even sneered at. -- bkw
Nice the way you wipe out 40 years of compat with your own personal fiat - nice dictatorial, non-community response.
you want a way to fix it -- go back to 12.1 where the bin-files lived in /bin, not in /usr/bin w/symlinks in /bin... How could anyone justify having a subdir that was KNOWN to be a separate partition on many peoples system be the homedir for bins and put symlinks in the root dir -- ESPECIALLY for MOUNT?!?!?! That's insane!....
I asked for any reason why it had to change from 12.1 to 12.2 -- no one wants to give one. The main effect of this is to break direct boot which seriously compromises development and security.
You ignore the issues of speed of boot -- and development. Those are important to many people as well. Yet you ignore those issues.
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org