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 0371213827E for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2013 01:38:38 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 82316E0C13; Thu, 12 Dec 2013 01:38:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ig0-f180.google.com (mail-ig0-f180.google.com [209.85.213.180]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 97766E0BFD for ; Thu, 12 Dec 2013 01:38:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-ig0-f180.google.com with SMTP id uq1so1595226igb.1 for ; Wed, 11 Dec 2013 17:38:29 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=tTQ5CDBXqfP4TEpw3A4ABxAt0QkT7bD5Use3AREdJaM=; b=JMLoCQG5zejfzdxhcg9BN7ErEv+8XGhOBe8o4a4BedORAP63cbePY+UT7ZRmMCda9+ P6IrFulzWoiEzNZp1FcgA5c4O2ND2Awu+mkqn9q6/YgB0Bc2sAblk17nWidMQt2GTsqJ obGmorkwDlQN+7wNApVs+db9PQhgwLCDrSWGVMTUpg/cvVTbl3Jcx+9b4kG3hmWOKx5F 15aoiDgTfS/n2hVDZS240b3ZpJbOZWUSiAvb4dqS3NXoZ/Qi+kdB14jrGH0YHKZuaNDu VHy+8X9WdVzJUix1JfV29gDx3KKW3l1fdprNq3JxmfbHi7P+f0IHqZsrhmEYAY8oZXGn vq3Q== X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlK6ZkMduFOKkBKh8r2gSORKLDz4E+DAxGTq6+BZE9oYV8eAI34QITrmgWktnuDHHXBZo+H 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 X-Received: by 10.42.215.80 with SMTP id hd16mr3938885icb.17.1386812309611; Wed, 11 Dec 2013 17:38:29 -0800 (PST) Sender: cardoe@cardoe.com Received: by 10.51.18.69 with HTTP; Wed, 11 Dec 2013 17:38:29 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <52A9052E.50301@gentoo.org> References: <20131211204110.GA30092@linux1> <52A9052E.50301@gentoo.org> Date: Wed, 11 Dec 2013 19:38:29 -0600 X-Google-Sender-Auth: jpFml5-P-6d9coFF-w-AHweLK2k Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: renaming "rc" binary in OpenRC From: Doug Goldstein To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Archives-Salt: 534a6c26-863b-4f83-9015-19f33c5bcb9b X-Archives-Hash: aee2dedf3917983a235979be5d399f7e On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 6:37 PM, Patrick Lauer wrote: > On 12/12/2013 04:41 AM, 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. > > Make it build-time configurable. Keep default at "rc". Let Debian and > others rename it as they want/need. > >> 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? > > It's change to change things, it doesn't fix any bugs we have. > > So don't break things for fun, please ... Honestly, with Linux systems a symlink won't matter. Just rename the binary to "openrc" so that we are closer with Debian. It would be nice if in the future docs and blogs and other things could share the same info. For Gentoo just symlink rc -> openrc and call it a day. There's also no reason to remove the symlink in the next release like others have said. Keep the thing around for as long as is possible. Cause if you drop it, you're liable to break someone upgrading an old system and they have a higher chance to miss an important ewarn and you know how much I hate breaking upgrades. -- Doug Goldstein