From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 866AB13827E for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2013 20:48:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DB381E0C0F; Wed, 11 Dec 2013 20:48:11 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E6555E0C09 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2013 20:48:10 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (SSID-MASON-SECURE-219.wireless.gmu.edu [192.5.215.219]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: creffett) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DA90133F59C for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2013 20:48:09 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <52A8CF7D.3090309@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 15:47:57 -0500 From: Chris Reffett User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: renaming "rc" binary in OpenRC References: <20131211204110.GA30092@linux1> In-Reply-To: <20131211204110.GA30092@linux1> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------060700010801060603070308" X-Antivirus: avast! (VPS 131211-0, 12/11/2013), Outbound message X-Antivirus-Status: Clean X-Archives-Salt: 069a29db-b391-401c-bb99-c8eff4091ff2 X-Archives-Hash: b70af4871b38a7110e29c8ba3e83a5ad This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------060700010801060603070308 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 12/11/2013 3:41 PM, William Hubbs wrote: > All, > > We got a request from Debian to rename the "rc" binary of OpenRC due to > a naming conflict they have. They have a port of the at&t plan 9 shell, > which has a binary named "rc" as well[1]. > > My thought is to rename our "rc" to "openrc", since that would be > unique. > > I know at least one thing that will break is everyone's inittab, so > should I sed their inittab in our live ebuild or expect them to fix it > and give a warning? I know that once OpenRC with this change is > released, it will need to probably be p.masked until there is a new > release of sysvinit that updates the inittab. > > I'm not sure what else will break. > > Does anyone have any ideas wrt other things to look for, or should I > make the changes upstream and have people let us know what > else breaks? > > William > > [1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=493958 The idea of running a sed on inittab in an ebuild, no matter what the context, terrifies me. Perhaps we can ease this in slowly by renaming rc -> openrc and symlinking rc -> openrc and making a release with that change concurrent with a news item? Or even just do that in the ebuild rather than in the actual sources. I don't think Debian will keel over and die if it takes a little extra time for the change to go through, and it beats a ton of broken systems. Chris Reffett --------------060700010801060603070308 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit On 12/11/2013 3:41 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> All,
>
> We got a request from Debian to rename the "rc" binary of OpenRC due to
> a naming conflict they have. They have a port of the at&t plan 9 shell,
> which has a binary named "rc" as well[1].
>
> My thought is to rename our "rc" to "openrc", since that would be
> unique.
>
> I know at least one thing that will break is everyone's inittab, so
> should I sed their inittab in our live ebuild or expect them to fix it
> and give a warning? I know that once OpenRC with this change is
> released, it will need to probably be p.masked until there is a new
> release of sysvinit that updates the inittab.
>
> I'm not sure what else will break.
>
> Does anyone have any ideas wrt other things to look for, or should I
> make the changes upstream and have people let us know what
> else breaks?
>
> William
>
> [1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=493958
The idea of running a sed on inittab in an ebuild, no matter what the context, terrifies me. Perhaps we can ease this in slowly by renaming rc -> openrc and symlinking rc -> openrc and making a release with that change concurrent with a news item? Or even just do that in the ebuild rather than in the actual sources. I don't think Debian will keel over and die if it takes a little extra time for the change to go through, and it beats a ton of broken systems.

Chris Reffett

--------------060700010801060603070308--