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 521D613827E for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2013 20:53:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id CABD0E0C01; Wed, 11 Dec 2013 20:53:22 +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 C9836E0BD0 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2013 20:53:21 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [192.168.1.2] (unknown [94.6.147.80]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: hwoarang) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 97AF133F4D7 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2013 20:53:20 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <52A8D0B0.9010709@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 20:53:04 +0000 From: Markos Chandras User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.1.1 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> <52A8CF7D.3090309@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <52A8CF7D.3090309@gentoo.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.6 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 5b6c8ff0-d9aa-4477-aacb-e140c50c3c91 X-Archives-Hash: 6f81af34481c73b45272a2d3a6034b54 On 12/11/2013 08:47 PM, Chris Reffett wrote: > 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 > > +1 The ebuild can grep the inittab and it if finds an "rc" there, just print a huge warning telling the user to migrate || die. -- Regards, Markos Chandras