From: Pacho Ramos <pacho@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: openrc use flag
Date: Thu, 21 Apr 2011 22:03:42 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <1303416222.4481.6.camel@localhost.localdomain> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <20110421193058.GB12112@linux1>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2002 bytes --]
El jue, 21-04-2011 a las 14:30 -0500, William Hubbs escribió:
> On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 08:20:32PM +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote:
> > El mié, 20-04-2011 a las 22:02 +0400, Peter Volkov escribió:
> > > В Срд, 20/04/2011 в 12:24 -0500, William Hubbs пишет:
> > > > The author of the bug feels that the way to fix this is for us to put a
> > > > check in openrc that makes it refuse to run services if it was not used
> > > > in the boot process.
> > >
> > > This is good idea to have in any case since I remember my system went
> > > crazy after I've tried to start some service inside chroot.
> > >
> > > > This may work; however, I do not feel that it addresses the root cause
> > > > of the bug. I feel that the root cause is packages unconditionally
> > > > installing udev rules which assume everyone uses openrc.
> > >
> > > I'd voted to have both implemented.
> > >
> >
> > I would vote for the first one, I still don't like "openrc" USE flag
> > approach much because:
> > 1. Would need to rebuild some packages when switching between init
> > systems.
>
> I don't think you can get away from this, no matter how you approach
> it. The other approach I thought of is to include the udev pieces
> directly in openrc and make it possible to build openrc with or without
> udev integration. That will still mean you have to rebuild openrc though
> if you want udev support.
>
With mgorny's approach looks like recompiling wouldn't be needed :-/
> > 2. I remember (from "logrotate" USE flag case) that using an USE flag
> > for simply installing or not a file is not usually preferred :-/
>
> In the logrotate use flag case, that decision was made because a user
> can use INSTALL_MASK="/etc/logrotate.d" in make.conf to block those
> files. But that argument definitely does not apply here. If the user
> doesn't want this support what should he set INSTALL_MASK to?
>
That's true, thanks for the explanation :)
> William
>
[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2011-04-21 20:04 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 16+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2011-04-20 17:24 [gentoo-dev] rfc: openrc use flag William Hubbs
2011-04-20 18:02 ` Peter Volkov
2011-04-20 18:20 ` Pacho Ramos
2011-04-21 19:30 ` William Hubbs
2011-04-21 20:03 ` Pacho Ramos [this message]
2011-04-21 20:52 ` William Hubbs
2011-04-22 9:50 ` Pacho Ramos
2011-04-22 8:26 ` Peter Volkov
2011-04-22 8:58 ` Michał Górny
2011-04-20 18:22 ` William Hubbs
2011-04-20 18:33 ` Michał Górny
2011-04-21 4:52 ` [gentoo-dev] " Duncan
2011-04-20 18:44 ` [gentoo-dev] " Fabian Groffen
2011-04-21 2:31 ` Jeroen Roovers
2011-04-21 4:34 ` William Hubbs
2011-04-21 19:05 ` William Hubbs
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=1303416222.4481.6.camel@localhost.localdomain \
--to=pacho@gentoo.org \
--cc=gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox