[opensuse-factory] Re: Why does MS-Windows need no "initrd-equivalent" in order to boot w/a wider range of x86[-64] compat HW?
Ken Schneider - openSUSE wrote:
On 11/28/2012 07:07 PM, Linda Walsh pecked at the keyboard and wrote:
Linda,
You have been ask several times to stop cross posting, so once again please stop.
Um which list does one post questions about current and future development and current releases on? -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Thu, 29 Nov 2012 17:35:12 -0800 Linda Walsh <suse@tlinx.org> wrote:
Um which list does one post questions about current and future development and current releases on?
This one. BTW, do you have idea (proposal/solution) how to boot different hardware without initrd, but also without asking users to learn how to deal with kernel configuration and compilation on installation, and later on each kernel upgrade. For you it can be simple to fiddle with kernels and you may consider that not a waste of time, but it is not for me, and even lesser for people that just learned how to download iso and burn it on CD. I don't want to know how kernel works as long as all hardware works with satisfactory performance. Although, I do know many ways to boot computer and can fix, or workaround, many issues, I don't like when I have to. For me it is *not* what I want to do every day. Skills needed to fix problems are remnants from old times, when they were part of running Linux. New users lack skills and in 99% of cases they don't look for something new to learn, nor look for entertainment in computer configuration, but something that will run their computer better then what they have now. Dealing with older Vista laptop right now, that is faster from the USB stick with openSUSE 12.2, then Vista from the hard disk I can understand that people want to try it. It is free and it has all that 99% of users need; no need to chase applications around the web. -- Regards, Rajko. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
Rajko wrote:
On Thu, 29 Nov 2012 17:35:12 -0800 Linda Walsh <suse@tlinx.org> wrote:
Um which list does one post questions about current and future development and current releases on?
This one.
BTW, do you have idea (proposal/solution) how to boot different hardware without initrd, but also without asking users to learn how to deal with kernel configuration and compilation on installation, and later on each kernel upgrade.
Why can't you have the option to have both? I.e. if you want to have it boot from disk, they install package 'disk-boot', that will build it for their system and install it. I'm not suggesting that the default of initrd need be change -- nor that it is right for everyone: I'm saying, 1) don't make it very difficult by moving boot related binaries off of the root partition, and 2) make a package available to those who want to boot from disk but don't have the knowledge or desire to learn how to set it up. I really only need 1) -- don't kill compatibility. But @2 has several variations -- the reason I went to disk boot is because I couldn't get native text console output and I had a problem during boot that I couldn't analyze from initrd. The best I got from grub/initrd was a blank screen until I got a login prompt. I had all the verbose options set, they were ignored. I wanted control-c to break out of hung bootup scripts... wasn't doable without me creating my own intird -- something that is FAR more difficult than creating a kernel (making a kernel is well documented and has several methods, making a suse initrd .. no docs and only 1 right true that changes with each release). Second possibility on #2 is to figure out how to do what all the old unix vendors did -- dynamic config for HW and link that into a cached copy -- no compile necessary. I don't know why this hasn't been done for linux -- a util that allows you to take modules and bind them into the kernel, after the fact, without recompilation.
For you it can be simple to fiddle with kernels and you may consider that not a waste of time, but it is not for me, and even lesser for people that just learned how to download iso and burn it on CD.
---- Wait till you need to make your own suse-compat initrd... then you'll realize why being able to boot w/o one is a godsend.
Dealing with older Vista laptop right now, that is faster from the USB stick with openSUSE 12.2, then Vista from the hard disk I can understand that people want to try it. It is free and it has all that 99% of users need; no need to chase applications around the web.
Please get what I want str8 -- not to eliminate or remove current options, but to restore previous functionality and allow both. Then, ideally, allow for an optional package that handles it as as well or better than dkms does for recompiling modules for each version. I wouldn't want it done during boot -- let me do it in background while I am not waiting for a boot (stupid dkms design...idjots!)... Does that make anything more clear. The reason this came up is that suse is making everything fail if you look at it wrong. They are hard-coding interdependencies into programs so you can't upgrade without taking they whole thing... sorta like windows update. A really horrid case is hardcoding the version into vim for what perl it will allow. The version on windows has no such restriction. It's a suse-only "feature" (vim spec file): %define vim_prereq %{name}-base = %{version} # Explicitly require versioned perl for libperl.so %define perl_requires perl = %(rpm -q --qf '%{VERSION}' perl) vim doesn't require it -- but it's required by suse. You'll not be able to get bug fixes without them also violating your rights, like, "Oh, sorry, court order, says we had to release a mandatory update to remove the C compiler because it allowed hacker programs to be compiled".... (a slightly worse version of amazon deleting purchased books off of people's kindle when they next hooked up for any reason -- due to a lawsuit..which has happened)... I have things break all over the place on full upgrades and critical machines are offline for days, with random failures for months following. That's not acceptable. -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 02:21:10AM -0800, Linda Walsh wrote: [ <8 ] longish blah, blah, chatter purged
That's not acceptable.
Then fix it. That's what the Open Build Service is intended for. Branch the package and add your chnages. Submit request it and get a review by the poeple maintaining it. Or file a bug report. But please stop with this unproductive chatter habit on this list. This is opensuse-factory and the goal of this list is 'Discussions about the development of the next openSUSE version'. This is not for bug reporting. If you spot a bug and believe you have the solution then go and fix it, Please show your commitment and do something! Go, fix it! Go and do something! No reply needed! Do it now! It's your turn! No, don't press the r key! Use osc branch and enhance the package! Be nice and get a christmas gift. Maybe. https://en.openSUSE.org/openSUSE:Build_Service_Tutorial Good luck! Lars -- Lars Müller [ˈlaː(r)z ˈmʏlɐ] Samba Team + SUSE Labs SUSE Linux, Maxfeldstraße 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany
Lars M������������������������ wrote:
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 02:21:10AM -0800, Linda Walsh wrote: [ <8 ] longish blah, blah, chatter purged
That's not acceptable.
Then fix it.
Most of the things, I have raised of late, *used* to work. That means I can't fix it --- because someone else will go in and undo the the fix. Why, for example, are spec files being recoded to included specific version dependencies when they used to not have them? It USED to be the case that you didn't need a sterile build environment to build everything -- that was broken as well.. I can't undo all the damage that is growing ... There are too many people ... it's the software version of the Tragedy of the Commons. That's what the Open Build Service is intended for.
Branch the package and add your chnages. Submit request it and get a review by the poeple maintaining it. Or file a bug report.
I have filed bug reports.. they get closed out as "won't fixed or rejected as broken by design (i.e. old design is no longer supported, thus the bug report is "invalid". -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Most of the things, I have raised of late, *used* to work. That means I can't fix it --- because someone else will go in and undo the the fix. Why, for example, are spec files being recoded to included specific version dependencies when they used to not have them?
It USED to be the case that you didn't need a sterile build environment to build everything -- that was broken as well..
You don't strictly need it but it is a good thing that distribution building provides one so easily and requires distribution contributors (Factory!!!) to use it. For your private matters, you can do what you want.
I can't undo all the damage that is growing ... There are too many people ... it's the software version of the Tragedy of the Commons.
I don't see how this relates to factory but it's wrong. They're not depleting a free resource but actually contributing fixes for free.
Branch the package and add your chnages. Submit request it and get a review by the poeple maintaining it. Or file a bug report. --- I have filed bug reports.. they get closed out as "won't fixed or rejected as broken by design (i.e. old design is no longer supported, thus the bug report is "invalid".
You're still free to find fixes which don't interfere with mainstream interests. You're even free to fork openSUSE and maintain your own branch of it that suits special cases. But adding more messages of this type to factory list won't help. - -- Ralf Lang Linux Consultant / Developer Tel.: +49-170-6381563 Mail: lang@b1-systems.de B1 Systems GmbH Osterfeldstraße 7 / 85088 Vohburg / http://www.b1-systems.de GF: Ralph Dehner / Unternehmenssitz: Vohburg / AG: Ingolstadt,HRB 3537 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://www.enigmail.net/ iEYEARECAAYFAlDHZaIACgkQCs1dsHJ/X7DGVgCeJM0Uzc9osgYsD6t3WJTfIIGL ku4AniTsCuzVbXAQ7cVro5tSoBXpJQfH =K38/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
2012/12/11 Linda Walsh <suse@tlinx.org>:
Lars M������������������������ wrote:
On Tue, Dec 11, 2012 at 02:21:10AM -0800, Linda Walsh wrote: [ <8 ] longish blah, blah, chatter purged
That's not acceptable.
Then fix it.
---- Most of the things, I have raised of late, *used* to work. That means I can't fix it --- because someone else will go in and undo the the fix. Why, for example, are spec files being recoded to included specific version dependencies when they used to not have them?
It USED to be the case that you didn't need a sterile build environment to build everything -- that was broken as well..
I can't undo all the damage that is growing ... There are too many people ... it's the software version of the Tragedy of the Commons.
That's what the Open Build Service is intended for.
Branch the package and add your chnages. Submit request it and get a review by the poeple maintaining it. Or file a bug report.
--- I have filed bug reports.. they get closed out as "won't fixed or rejected as broken by design (i.e. old design is no longer supported, thus the bug report is "invalid".
-- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
You should migrate to Slackware! -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-factory+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, e-mail: opensuse-factory+owner@opensuse.org
participants (5)
-
Lars Müller -
Linda Walsh -
Nelson Marques -
Rajko -
Ralf Lang