On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 2:37 AM, Dale <rdalek1...@gmail.com> wrote: > Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: >> >> On Sat, Oct 15, 2011 at 2:15 AM, Michael Schreckenbauer<grim...@gmx.de> >> wrote: >>> >>> I would. But given the way udev people "solve" those issues, I don't. >>> If something on /var is needed during boot in the next ten years, they >>> will >>> propose to move it to /. They do it with /run, they do it with /lock, >>> they >>> will do it the same way the next time such an issue arises. >> >> You keep speculating and speculating. When you have some evidence to >> sustain your claims, we talk. >> >> Regards. > > Can you point to where a dev has said that /var, /home or any other changes > will NEVER happen?
Of course not, but this is the same as any accusation: the people making the accusation has to provide the evidence. YOU are the one making the accusation, YOU provide the evidence. > I would start with the dev that caused all this if it > were me. I would like to hear that from him for sure. Let's see if you can > prove your claim then we'll talk. *I* don't have to prove anything because I'm talkin about the facts *right now*. You guys are the ones speculating about an imaginary future. > Like I said, a year or so ago, I would have thought anyone saying /usr would > need to be on / to boot or a init thingy was losing their mind. It is just > not the way Linux is supposed to be. Yet here we are. Says who? I say it is exactly the way Linux is supposed to be. And /usr doesn't *need* to be on /; just get an initramfs and you can have it in an NFS from the other side of the planet. Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
