From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-dev+bounces-59634-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id BF7351381F3
for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Sat, 13 Apr 2013 21:22:55 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 93DB4E0B4A;
Sat, 13 Apr 2013 21:22:52 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-vc0-f172.google.com (mail-vc0-f172.google.com [209.85.220.172])
(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id ABD44E0B45
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 13 Apr 2013 21:22:51 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-vc0-f172.google.com with SMTP id gd11so3030767vcb.31
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Sat, 13 Apr 2013 14:22:50 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=mime-version:x-received:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
:x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
bh=2qsZUJMxMJwn/QOdNtQw17vX2YohajEhAgKzGEItX2o=;
b=GJiIKRklatlkqTsoPDqiZw4qcNZBjoMxZp/AnG8u87OL9yHVwWST2yIl1NM2IRskSF
646IjdJEHSu+g1YS5WYSxKaCrIEL2GGIRGNTFYRzD/rzwxrkDK9A/3xOzEKfiEyox1Ab
N3bzlAvs2EA99biGCRWpAGVJGGafvUEoTLocwB+usKQphQJh+ryAZMPn+0v/MoE3dhIq
98mJKNo8vfp/fI1V/qBBWkycVVWq7Hd3DhP19jnxJ5oq8JyWYkcd6r9FsfqOZHXumc7Y
wWK2KYFAK6Sdq9g5mUcHY9AVRBD/ERKjrA/gOWOwfJFsHwBw6jxjNcVtI1/236CQFxGm
v1eQ==
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.52.65.147 with SMTP id x19mr10571765vds.27.1365888170819;
Sat, 13 Apr 2013 14:22:50 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com
Received: by 10.52.168.4 with HTTP; Sat, 13 Apr 2013 14:22:50 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <20130413205707.GA31433@linux1>
References: <20130413194314.GA31253@linux1>
<CAGfcS_kf9yGzaiPEKmHPMiqmrMgnsU2W=+PUjaasdaTdbA08WA@mail.gmail.com>
<20130413205707.GA31433@linux1>
Date: Sat, 13 Apr 2013 17:22:50 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: geHV6e9s3N6uPaFl7bY-gpHrAac
Message-ID: <CAGfcS_mgE--KiTCMDUPYqa_jvZPbXUS2rg_yZLL5YazqaXnqWQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] new eclass: systemd-next.eclass
From: Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>, Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@gentoo.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Archives-Salt: 1457460e-b158-4780-89e7-9e659c718483
X-Archives-Hash: 7816da4112276f0fd63d7239158c5d46
On Sat, Apr 13, 2013 at 4:57 PM, William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org> wrote:
> It is not an upstream fork, it is a configuration/installation
> approach that follows upstream's recommendations for install locations.
> It also allows the user more choices wrt which parts of systemd are
> built or installed and allows more fine-grained use dependencies for
> other packages.
Thanks. Might not hurt to document somewhere (wiki/etc) so that users
can make an informed choice and to understand the contrasting
philosophies.
Dennis recently blogged on this topic. While cooperation should
always be done when possible, if somebody really feels there is value
in having an alternative I really don't see the problem. The main
concern I'd have is coordination with other packages - for example I'd
hate to see the unit files going into different places since that
would make it impossible for other packages to determine where the
user wants them (units might be installed before either implementation
is installed). If conflict between alternative implementations starts
creating problems for the rest of the distro then it only makes sense
for the council to step in.
Rich