Re: [gentoo-dev] openrc 0.12 - netifrc/newnet mix-up

["Rick \"Zero_Chaos\" Farina" <zerochaos@gentoo.org>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 12/08/2013 05:25 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 07, 2013 at 12:52:08AM -0500, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
>> 1.) If we are going to stuff this into @system then we probably want a
>> USE=nonet flag to allow users to not pull anything in if they really
>> don't want it.
> 
> We don't have to put this in @system at all. We could just have a
> virtual/network-manager, like we have virtual/cron, virtual/logger,
> virtual/mta, etc. None of these are installed by default; you have to
> choose one as part of your installation process. The more I read this
> thread, the more I agree with this approach; let the user make the
> choice as part of the installation process.
> 
>> Just as a side note, after reading the thread up through this point, I'm
>> terrified of the individuals who wish to remove networking support from
>> stage3 entirely.  If anyone wants to push that idea then that needs to
>> be addressed by the council.  Period.  Such a major change is going to
>> cause a holy war, and myself and others will actively revert any change
>> which removes net from stage3 under the guise of "critical breakage"
>> unless there is council direction that says we are no longer including
>> net support in the stage3s.
> 
> I am in agreement with Rich and Peter. This isn't a matter of breaking
> the stages; it is a matter of us getting out of the way and letting the
> users pick the network stack they want. We do this for the kernel, boot
> loader, etc, so I don't understand why you feel we need council
> direction to make a similar change for the network manager.


I am softening a bit, but I'm really concerned that the stages all of a
sudden not having net is going to be an issue for people.  Maybe I'm
mistaken, but it is hard for me to imagine that moving to a stage3 with
no net anything is an improvement.  I suppose you can't download a
stage3 without net, so you should typically be able to just chroot in...
I can honestly say most of the time when setup my arm systems I'm
unpacking the arm stage3 on an amd64 and then booting the arm device
with the base stage3 and fixing things from there.  I suppose it is
possible to use qemu to install things, as long as I don't mind
pretending it's 1999 due to the slow emulation speeds...  Yeah, I really
don't see an improvement here.  It works fine for "I'm an amd64 user and
that's all I'll ever use" but when you start talking about smaller
arches it really starts to become a hassle imho.

- -Zero
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/
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=WYkG
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----