From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 4.0.0 (2022-12-14) on finch.gentoo.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.0 required=5.0 tests=DMARC_MISSING, MAILING_LIST_MULTI autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=4.0.0 Received: from exchange.colubris.com (gate.colubris.com [206.162.167.230]) by chiba.3jane.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2475D200AD55 for ; Mon, 11 Mar 2002 15:26:13 -0600 (CST) Received: from colubris.com ([192.168.30.147] RDNS failed) by exchange.colubris.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(5.0.2195.3779); Mon, 11 Mar 2002 16:19:25 -0500 Message-ID: <3C8D20E3.8020707@colubris.com> Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2002 16:25:55 -0500 From: Yannick Koehler User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:0.9.8) Gecko/20020218 X-Accept-Language: en-us MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] /etc/init.d References: <3C8CEDD8.2000907@colubris.com> <3C8CF4C5.1050901@colubris.com> <20020311184223.GB28735@rearviewmirror.org> <3C8D0648.6070300@colubris.com> <20020311195636.GE28735@rearviewmirror.org> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-OriginalArrivalTime: 11 Mar 2002 21:19:25.0921 (UTC) FILETIME=[6BF33510:01C1C942] Sender: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org Errors-To: gentoo-dev-admin@gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.6 Precedence: bulk Reply-To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Gentoo Linux developer list List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: X-Archives-Salt: f968328b-efbf-4e27-8a8c-bb84e6aa9afe X-Archives-Hash: 6c3c8bf3c10795a5d25db338bd2b6eaa Matt Beland wrote: > On Mon, Mar 11, 2002 at 02:32:24PM -0500, Yannick Koehler wrote: > They are not more important, than the binaries, but they are far more likely > to have been modified by the end user. If the end user has modified the > binary, then they almost certainly are not using the ebuild. However, if all > I want/need to do is modify the initscript, then I'm not going to go to the > added hassle of manually tracking the program just because I use a different > init from that provided by the ebuild. I think that gentoo's ebuild system open the doors to customized binaries. That's actually why I like gentoo so much, I can grab an ebuild, run ebuild .ebuild extract, then customize the source code and do the rest compile/install/qmerge. It's even more simpler than ./configure && make && make install because it will override my previous files and I'm sure not to have duplicates. So in my case its exactly the reverse that occurs, I have more binaries customized than scripts inside /etc/init.d. I recentely changes my syslog-ng to strip the program name from the $MSG macro because I already had a $PROGRAM macro displaying its name. I sent the patch to the owner meanwhile I have my version running. I fixed some issues inside my mozilla because I knew that code. I changed the way some other binaries worked too to my liking. Now I know what I did and it's easy for me to re-emerge that stuff. But inside /etc I had to modify files which I don't know all, some where modified by program which I have no idea what exactly they did until I read their manual. So I can't blind copy new files. I have to do the merge but last time my merge could have been 7 files instead of 35. and the previous time 5 instead of 24. etc.. And I expect not to be the only one which means that you can multiply that by a big number. So I think there's place in there for enhancement. > >>Therefore I think they should be treated the same. Now they are treated >>as config file and require end-users intervention when I don't see a >>reason for most end-user. Like programs, some users will modify their >>program by using personnaly modified source tree and those would know >>not to put the binary or merge those package. >> > > They are treated as a config file because they are a config file. They control > how the binaries are started, how they're stopped, and how they're tracked > while running. The current behavior is the proper behavior. From what I understand from a previous post, the config of those scripts are in /etc/conf.d and not inside the scripts themselves. > >>Actually I think it's even worse treating those files as config. >>Because new users, the one that you always want to get in a distro may >>be running pretty old script as they may not be aware on how to do the >>merge step manually. >> > > I understand the point behind being newbie-friendly, and the arguments for > making something "easier for new users", but I have to disagree in this case. > You're advocating making the system easier for a new user while making life > more difficult for an advanced user. Quite frankly, that's why many of us > *moved* to Gentoo over RedHat or one of the other distributions - they make > life easier for new users at the expense of some of the innate power and > flexibility of Unix. > > End-users that modify their scripts should use either different names or backup them. As most people do about original works. I don't agree it make their life more complicated because anyway those people knows more and won't look forever at the cause of their problems compares to newbies. Yannick Koehler