[gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?

[gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 421 bytes --]

now that the mktemp binary has been moved out of debianutils and integrated 
straight into coreutils, perhaps it's time to ask how important this package 
is to everyone.  current debianutils is part of "system" and provides:
 - installkernel
 - run-parts
 - tempfile
 - savelog
 - mkboot
do people consider these things critical ?  i dont know the last time i 
personally needed/wanted any of these ...
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 827 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?

[Rémi Cardona]

Mike Frysinger a écrit :
> do people consider these things critical ?  i dont know the last time i 
> personally needed/wanted any of these ...

I for one didn't even know what tools it provided ... let alone what I 
might use them for.

Rémi
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?

[Fabian Groffen]

On 28-01-2008 07:23:18 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> do people consider these things critical ?  i dont know the last time i 
> personally needed/wanted any of these ...

Given that it needs a jumbo patch to compile on non-GNU/Linux systems
lacking GNU getopt, I wouldn't mind if it would get dropped from system.


-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Re: debianutils: system worthy ?

[Duncan]

Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> posted
200801280723.19003.vapier@gentoo.org, excerpted below, on  Mon, 28 Jan
2008 07:23:18 -0500:

> current debianutils is part of "system" and provides:
>  - installkernel

>  - mkboot

> do people consider these things critical ?  i dont know the last time i
> personally needed/wanted any of these ...

Mainstream kernel's default make install uses /sbin/installkernel if it 
exists, so I've been using it, invoking the kernel's make install from my 
own kernel scripts.  installkernel invokes mkboot...

I'd guess the others are equally likely to be invoked in various custom 
scripts people have, figuring it's safe to depend on stuff in system.  Of 
course, if they have custom scripts already, they can easily implement 
the additional customization, or simply add debianutils to their world 
file, given time...

At minimum, I'd say make the usual BIG WARNING NOISES in the usual 
places, and probably still expect complaints.  It may still be worth 
doing to cut down on system size... or not, depending on where the system 
size vs. inevitable complaints comes down.  (FWIW, it's precisely this 
sort of early warning that's a big reason I read this group.  One would 
think such early warnings would be even /more/ important to those running 
production systems on Gentoo, but...)

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: debianutils: system worthy ?

[Jan Kundrát]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 453 bytes --]

Duncan wrote:
> Mainstream kernel's default make install uses /sbin/installkernel if it 
> exists, so I've been using it, invoking the kernel's make install from my 
> own kernel scripts.  installkernel invokes mkboot...

We (the docs team) have never suggested out users to run `make install`
for various reasons, see bug 183346 (and the linked gentoo-doc thread)
for details.

Cheers,
-jkt

-- 
cd /local/pub && more beer > /dev/mouth


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 252 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: debianutils: system worthy ?

[Duncan]

Jan Kundrát <jkt@gentoo.org> posted 479E0BB2.3020102@gentoo.org, excerpted
below, on  Mon, 28 Jan 2008 18:06:58 +0100:

> Duncan wrote:
>> Mainstream kernel's default make install uses /sbin/installkernel if it
>> exists, so I've been using it, invoking the kernel's make install from
>> my own kernel scripts.  installkernel invokes mkboot...
> 
> We (the docs team) have never suggested out users to run `make install`
> for various reasons, see bug 183346 (and the linked gentoo-doc thread)
> for details.


Thanks.  I sort of knew that, but some of us first got comfortable 
installing kernels on other distributions, and brought our scripts and 
habits with us, changing them only enough to work in their new habitat. 
=8^)

Here, I've never used the Gentoo kernel packages, simply because I've 
never needed to, because I already had a system that worked for me -- 
downloading, verifying, configuring, compiling and installing the kernel 
direct off of kernel.org, with my own site-specific patches.  There's 
probably a significant number of others doing similar things, and if I 
were to guess, I'd say a fair share of those that do are probably running 
professional and therefore production systems, simply because that's the 
sort that's likely to /have/ such customized solutions -- likely in some 
cases even designed specifically so the same scripts can be used on 
multiple distributions.

As caster pointed out, however, just removing the package from system 
doesn't unmerge it, and if people run --depclean without --ask or --
pretend first, well...  Maybe they'll learn to do so, next time! =8^)

So yeah, I'd say a warning is warranted, but after that just do it.  
Surely some will complain, but it's not like we can be there constantly 
holding their hands.  Gentoo makes a very deliberate point of expecting 
its users to be grownups in that way, and I'm glad it does! =8^)

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: debianutils: system worthy ?

[Vlastimil Babka]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 740 bytes --]

Duncan wrote:
> At minimum, I'd say make the usual BIG WARNING NOISES in the usual 
> places, and probably still expect complaints.  It may still be worth 
> doing to cut down on system size... or not, depending on where the system 
> size vs. inevitable complaints comes down.  (FWIW, it's precisely this 
> sort of early warning that's a big reason I read this group.  One would 
> think such early warnings would be even /more/ important to those running 
> production systems on Gentoo, but...)

I'd relax, removing from system doesn't make the package automagically 
uninstall for everybody who has it. And running emerge --depclean 
without --pretend, especially on production systems, sounds stupid anyway :)

Caster


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 252 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: debianutils: system worthy ?

[Duncan]

Vlastimil Babka <caster@gentoo.org> posted 479E0EF7.2040108@gentoo.org,
excerpted below, on  Mon, 28 Jan 2008 18:20:55 +0100:

> I'd relax, removing from system doesn't make the package automagically
> uninstall for everybody who has it. And running emerge --depclean
> without --pretend, especially on production systems, sounds stupid
> anyway :)

You are absolutely correct, those that use the tools Gentoo both gives 
them and repeatedly stresses in the documentation, don't have that 
problem.  As I said, however, and Jakob can sure back me up on this as 
I've seen him make the point =8^), it's what people /should/ do, but...

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?

[Doug Klima]

Mike Frysinger wrote:
> now that the mktemp binary has been moved out of debianutils and integrated 
> straight into coreutils, perhaps it's time to ask how important this package 
> is to everyone.  current debianutils is part of "system" and provides:
>  - installkernel
>  - run-parts
>  - tempfile
>  - savelog
>  - mkboot
> do people consider these things critical ?  i dont know the last time i 
> personally needed/wanted any of these ...
> -mike
>   
I feel the same as you Mike. Toss it.
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?

[Yuri Vasilevski]

On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 07:23:18 -0500
Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:

> now that the mktemp binary has been moved out of debianutils and
> integrated straight into coreutils, perhaps it's time to ask how
> important this package is to everyone.  current debianutils is part
> of "system" and provides:
>  - installkernel
>  - run-parts
>  - tempfile
>  - savelog
>  - mkboot
> do people consider these things critical ?  i dont know the last time
> i personally needed/wanted any of these ...

I would say drop it from system and add to RDEPEND in kernel-2.eclass
for ${ETYPE} == sources.

Kindest regards,
Yuri.
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?

[Petteri Räty]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 727 bytes --]

Yuri Vasilevski kirjoitti:
> On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 07:23:18 -0500
> Mike Frysinger <vapier@gentoo.org> wrote:
> 
>> now that the mktemp binary has been moved out of debianutils and
>> integrated straight into coreutils, perhaps it's time to ask how
>> important this package is to everyone.  current debianutils is part
>> of "system" and provides:
>>  - installkernel
>>  - run-parts
>>  - tempfile
>>  - savelog
>>  - mkboot
>> do people consider these things critical ?  i dont know the last time
>> i personally needed/wanted any of these ...
> 
> I would say drop it from system and add to RDEPEND in kernel-2.eclass
> for ${ETYPE} == sources.
> 
> Kindest regards,
> Yuri.

+1

Regards,
Petteri


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 252 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?

[Krzysiek Pawlik]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 394 bytes --]

Yuri Vasilevski wrote:
> I would say drop it from system and add to RDEPEND in kernel-2.eclass
> for ${ETYPE} == sources.

IMHO that's a bad idea - everybody use some kernel sources, but not everybody 
runs `make install'. I'm for dropping debianutils from system.

-- 
Krzysiek Pawlik   <nelchael at gentoo.org>   key id: 0xBC555551
desktop-misc, java, apache, ppc, vim, kernel...


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 252 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?

[Petteri Räty]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 522 bytes --]

Krzysiek Pawlik kirjoitti:
> Yuri Vasilevski wrote:
>> I would say drop it from system and add to RDEPEND in kernel-2.eclass
>> for ${ETYPE} == sources.
> 
> IMHO that's a bad idea - everybody use some kernel sources, but not 
> everybody runs `make install'. I'm for dropping debianutils from system.
> 

BSD, prefix etc. I would say breaking make install is worse than 
requiring people to keep debianutils installed. They can just use 
package.provided if they want to get rid of it.

Regards,
Petteri


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 252 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?

[Ciaran McCreesh]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 450 bytes --]

On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 19:59:39 +0200
Petteri Räty <betelgeuse@gentoo.org> wrote:
> BSD, prefix etc. I would say breaking make install is worse than 
> requiring people to keep debianutils installed. They can just use 
> package.provided if they want to get rid of it.

...which then breaks things that have a real dep upon it. That's a
really bad idea, just like absolutely everything else involving
package.provided.

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?

[Petteri Räty]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 555 bytes --]

Ciaran McCreesh kirjoitti:
> On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 19:59:39 +0200
> Petteri Räty <betelgeuse@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> BSD, prefix etc. I would say breaking make install is worse than 
>> requiring people to keep debianutils installed. They can just use 
>> package.provided if they want to get rid of it.
> 
> ...which then breaks things that have a real dep upon it. That's a
> really bad idea, just like absolutely everything else involving
> package.provided.
> 

Indeed but users do stupid stuff every once in a while.

Regards,
Petteri


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 252 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?

[Matthias B.]

On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 19:59:39 +0200 Petteri Räty <betelgeuse@gentoo.org>
wrote:

> Krzysiek Pawlik kirjoitti:
> > Yuri Vasilevski wrote:
> >> I would say drop it from system and add to RDEPEND in kernel-2.eclass
> >> for ${ETYPE} == sources.
> > 
> > IMHO that's a bad idea - everybody use some kernel sources, but not 
> > everybody runs `make install'. I'm for dropping debianutils from
> > system.
> > 
> 
> BSD, prefix etc. I would say breaking make install is worse than 
> requiring people to keep debianutils installed. They can just use 
> package.provided if they want to get rid of it.

What's wrong with making it an optional dependency? Something like a
useflag 

makeinstall - Set this if you use 'make install' to install your kernels.

which would trigger the dependency. That way, both groups of people have
their way without breaking dependencies, right?

MSB

-- 
You know that you're lonely when you start laughing at your own jokes.

--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?

[Marius Mauch]

On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 21:43:38 +0100
"Matthias B." <msbREMOVE-THIS@winterdrache.de> wrote:

> What's wrong with making it an optional dependency? Something like a
> useflag 

Because if this would be done consistently we'd end up with several
thousand use flags long term, not really what I'd call managable.
Unfortunately use flags aren't the answer to everything.

Marius
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?

[Robin H. Johnson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 638 bytes --]

On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 07:23:18AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> now that the mktemp binary has been moved out of debianutils and integrated 
> straight into coreutils, perhaps it's time to ask how important this package 
> is to everyone.  current debianutils is part of "system" and provides:
>  - installkernel
installkernel is the only one off the top of my head I think is
marginally important.
Doing 'make install' in the kernel sources runs it for many arches.

-- 
Robin Hugh Johnson
Gentoo Linux Developer & Infra Guy
E-Mail     : robbat2@gentoo.org
GnuPG FP   : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED  F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 329 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?

[Philip Webb]

080128 Mike Frysinger wrote:
> now that the mktemp binary has been moved out of debianutils
> and integrated straight into coreutils,
> perhaps it's time to ask how important this package is to everyone.
> current debianutils is part of "system" and provides:
>  - installkernel
>  - run-parts
>  - tempfile
>  - savelog
>  - mkboot
> do people consider these things critical ?
> i dont know the last time i personally needed/wanted any of these ...

'equery d debianutils' gives me 

  app-admin/sysklogd-1.4.2_pre20061230 (sys-apps/debianutils)
  app-portage/gentoolkit-0.2.3-r1 (userland_GNU? sys-apps/debianutils)
  sys-apps/mktemp-1.5 (>=sys-apps/debianutils-2.16.2)

The 2nd cb ignored, but the others seem important.
I have Mktemp-1.5 installed, so what do you mean by your lines 1-2 ?
Sysklogd seems to be an important pkg too.
What am I missing (smile) ?

-- 
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT     ___________//___,  Philip Webb : purslow@chass.utoronto.ca
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|  Centre for Urban & Community Studies
TRANSIT    `-O----------O---'  University of Toronto
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?

[Chris Gianelloni]

On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 12:35 -0500, Philip Webb wrote:
> 'equery d debianutils' gives me 
> 
>   app-admin/sysklogd-1.4.2_pre20061230 (sys-apps/debianutils)
>   app-portage/gentoolkit-0.2.3-r1 (userland_GNU? sys-apps/debianutils)
>   sys-apps/mktemp-1.5 (>=sys-apps/debianutils-2.16.2)
> 
> The 2nd cb ignored, but the others seem important.
> I have Mktemp-1.5 installed, so what do you mean by your lines 1-2 ?

Funny enough, mktemp is included in newer coreutils.

> Sysklogd seems to be an important pkg too.

Unless you use metalog, or syslog-ng, or...

> What am I missing (smile) ?

That nothing that you've said counters the package not being needed in
the system target.  In fact, the packages that you list all explicitly
depend on debianutils, so they wouldn't break if we removed it from
system.  The problem is packages which require debianutils but do *not*
depend on it, because it's in "system" now.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering Strategic Lead
Games Developer
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?

[Chris Gianelloni]

On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 10:32 -0800, Chris Gianelloni wrote:
> That nothing that you've said counters the package not being needed in
> the system target.  In fact, the packages that you list all explicitly
> depend on debianutils, so they wouldn't break if we removed it from
> system.  The problem is packages which require debianutils but do *not*
> depend on it, because it's in "system" now.

I'm running a stage build with debianutils removed from system.  I'll
let everyone know the results.  If it works, I'll do the same for a
LiveDVD build, which covers most of the major packages in the tree.
Sure, there might be a few stragglers after that, but I doubt that there
would be too many.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering Strategic Lead
Games Developer
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?

[Santiago M. Mola]

On Jan 30, 2008 6:35 PM, Philip Webb <purslow@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> 'equery d debianutils' gives me
>
>   app-admin/sysklogd-1.4.2_pre20061230 (sys-apps/debianutils)
>   app-portage/gentoolkit-0.2.3-r1 (userland_GNU? sys-apps/debianutils)
>   sys-apps/mktemp-1.5 (>=sys-apps/debianutils-2.16.2)
>
> The 2nd cb ignored, but the others seem important.
> I have Mktemp-1.5 installed, so what do you mean by your lines 1-2 ?
> Sysklogd seems to be an important pkg too.
> What am I missing (smile) ?

Removing debianutils from the system _set_ doesn't mean to completely
remove it from the portage tree or user systems. It'll be a dependency
of sysklogd and mktemp anyway. This change does not affect you.

-- 
Santiago M. Mola
Jabber ID: cooldwind@gmail.com
-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?

[Natanael Copa]

On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 12:35 -0500, Philip Webb wrote:
> 080128 Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > now that the mktemp binary has been moved out of debianutils
> > and integrated straight into coreutils,
> > perhaps it's time to ask how important this package is to everyone.
> > current debianutils is part of "system" and provides:
> >  - installkernel
> >  - run-parts
> >  - tempfile
> >  - savelog
> >  - mkboot
> > do people consider these things critical ?
> > i dont know the last time i personally needed/wanted any of these ...
> 
> 'equery d debianutils' gives me 
> 
>   app-admin/sysklogd-1.4.2_pre20061230 (sys-apps/debianutils)
>   app-portage/gentoolkit-0.2.3-r1 (userland_GNU? sys-apps/debianutils)
>   sys-apps/mktemp-1.5 (>=sys-apps/debianutils-2.16.2)
> 
> The 2nd cb ignored, but the others seem important.
> I have Mktemp-1.5 installed, so what do you mean by your lines 1-2 ?
> Sysklogd seems to be an important pkg too.

savelog is used here to rotate logs from a cron job. I had a user
rewriting the whole script the other week so it works without either
perl or debianutils. (he replaced 80 lines perl with 7 lines POSIX shell
code using sed, awk)

I can create a bug on this so we get rid of both perl and debianutils
dependency for app-admin/sysklogd. (great for embedded)

-nc

-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1536 bytes --]

On Thursday 31 January 2008, Natanael Copa wrote:
> On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 12:35 -0500, Philip Webb wrote:
> > 080128 Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > now that the mktemp binary has been moved out of debianutils
> > > and integrated straight into coreutils,
> > > perhaps it's time to ask how important this package is to everyone.
> > > current debianutils is part of "system" and provides:
> > >  - installkernel
> > >  - run-parts
> > >  - tempfile
> > >  - savelog
> > >  - mkboot
> > > do people consider these things critical ?
> > > i dont know the last time i personally needed/wanted any of these ...
> >
> > 'equery d debianutils' gives me
> >
> >   app-admin/sysklogd-1.4.2_pre20061230 (sys-apps/debianutils)
> >   app-portage/gentoolkit-0.2.3-r1 (userland_GNU? sys-apps/debianutils)
> >   sys-apps/mktemp-1.5 (>=sys-apps/debianutils-2.16.2)
> >
> > The 2nd cb ignored, but the others seem important.
> > I have Mktemp-1.5 installed, so what do you mean by your lines 1-2 ?
> > Sysklogd seems to be an important pkg too.
>
> savelog is used here to rotate logs from a cron job. I had a user
> rewriting the whole script the other week so it works without either
> perl or debianutils. (he replaced 80 lines perl with 7 lines POSIX shell
> code using sed, awk)
>
> I can create a bug on this so we get rid of both perl and debianutils
> dependency for app-admin/sysklogd. (great for embedded)

i dont quite follow ... savelog is already a POSIX script and i dont see it 
executing perl ...
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 827 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?

[Natanael Copa]

On Thu, 2008-01-31 at 18:46 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Thursday 31 January 2008, Natanael Copa wrote:
> > On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 12:35 -0500, Philip Webb wrote:
> > > 080128 Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > > now that the mktemp binary has been moved out of debianutils
> > > > and integrated straight into coreutils,
> > > > perhaps it's time to ask how important this package is to everyone.
> > > > current debianutils is part of "system" and provides:
> > > >  - installkernel
> > > >  - run-parts
> > > >  - tempfile
> > > >  - savelog
> > > >  - mkboot
> > > > do people consider these things critical ?
> > > > i dont know the last time i personally needed/wanted any of these ...
> > >
> > > 'equery d debianutils' gives me
> > >
> > >   app-admin/sysklogd-1.4.2_pre20061230 (sys-apps/debianutils)
> > >   app-portage/gentoolkit-0.2.3-r1 (userland_GNU? sys-apps/debianutils)
> > >   sys-apps/mktemp-1.5 (>=sys-apps/debianutils-2.16.2)
> > >
> > > The 2nd cb ignored, but the others seem important.
> > > I have Mktemp-1.5 installed, so what do you mean by your lines 1-2 ?
> > > Sysklogd seems to be an important pkg too.
> >
> > savelog is used here to rotate logs from a cron job. I had a user
> > rewriting the whole script the other week so it works without either
> > perl or debianutils. (he replaced 80 lines perl with 7 lines POSIX shell
> > code using sed, awk)
> >
> > I can create a bug on this so we get rid of both perl and debianutils
> > dependency for app-admin/sysklogd. (great for embedded)
> 
> i dont quite follow ... savelog is already a POSIX script and i dont see it 
> executing perl ...

The /etc/cron.daily/syslog.cron executes both savelog
and /usr/sbin/syslogd-listfiles - which is a perl script. 

> -mike

-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?

[Mike Frysinger]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2074 bytes --]

On Friday 01 February 2008, Natanael Copa wrote:
> On Thu, 2008-01-31 at 18:46 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > On Thursday 31 January 2008, Natanael Copa wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 12:35 -0500, Philip Webb wrote:
> > > > 080128 Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > > > now that the mktemp binary has been moved out of debianutils
> > > > > and integrated straight into coreutils,
> > > > > perhaps it's time to ask how important this package is to everyone.
> > > > > current debianutils is part of "system" and provides:
> > > > >  - installkernel
> > > > >  - run-parts
> > > > >  - tempfile
> > > > >  - savelog
> > > > >  - mkboot
> > > > > do people consider these things critical ?
> > > > > i dont know the last time i personally needed/wanted any of these
> > > > > ...
> > > >
> > > > 'equery d debianutils' gives me
> > > >
> > > >   app-admin/sysklogd-1.4.2_pre20061230 (sys-apps/debianutils)
> > > >   app-portage/gentoolkit-0.2.3-r1 (userland_GNU?
> > > > sys-apps/debianutils) sys-apps/mktemp-1.5
> > > > (>=sys-apps/debianutils-2.16.2)
> > > >
> > > > The 2nd cb ignored, but the others seem important.
> > > > I have Mktemp-1.5 installed, so what do you mean by your lines 1-2 ?
> > > > Sysklogd seems to be an important pkg too.
> > >
> > > savelog is used here to rotate logs from a cron job. I had a user
> > > rewriting the whole script the other week so it works without either
> > > perl or debianutils. (he replaced 80 lines perl with 7 lines POSIX
> > > shell code using sed, awk)
> > >
> > > I can create a bug on this so we get rid of both perl and debianutils
> > > dependency for app-admin/sysklogd. (great for embedded)
> >
> > i dont quite follow ... savelog is already a POSIX script and i dont see
> > it executing perl ...
>
> The /etc/cron.daily/syslog.cron executes both savelog
> and /usr/sbin/syslogd-listfiles - which is a perl script.

oh, so you're looking to replace a script syslog provides rather than the 
savelog script

sure, i'd open a bug enhancement request on the topic
-mike

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 827 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?

[Natanael Copa]

On Fri, 2008-02-01 at 08:54 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Friday 01 February 2008, Natanael Copa wrote:
> > On Thu, 2008-01-31 at 18:46 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > > On Thursday 31 January 2008, Natanael Copa wrote:
...
> > > > I can create a bug on this so we get rid of both perl and debianutils
> > > > dependency for app-admin/sysklogd. (great for embedded)
> > >
> > > i dont quite follow ... savelog is already a POSIX script and i dont see
> > > it executing perl ...
> >
> > The /etc/cron.daily/syslog.cron executes both savelog
> > and /usr/sbin/syslogd-listfiles - which is a perl script.
> 
> oh, so you're looking to replace a script syslog provides rather than the 
> savelog script
> 
> sure, i'd open a bug enhancement request on the topic

bug #208560

-nc

-- 
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list