From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1QAHdG-0003v0-3r for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 08:10:30 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0B6B41C03B; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 08:10:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8DC551C030 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 08:09:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0F7F51B4050 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 08:09:40 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: by amavisd-new using ClamAV at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -2.524 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.524 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.075, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ag-gw1qoQ88c for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 08:09:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 493C41B4153 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 08:09:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QAHcD-00084q-Fm for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:09:25 +0200 Received: from ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.231.22.224]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:09:25 +0200 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Thu, 14 Apr 2011 10:09:25 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: openrc portage news item Date: Thu, 14 Apr 2011 08:09:08 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <20110413181538.GA2894@linux1> <4DA5EE4C.20808@gentoo.org> <20110413195851.GB3116@linux1> 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 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-231-22-224.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: Pan/0.134 (Wait for Me; GIT 9383aac branch-testing) Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 67c9dd69236a1cf4084440757e3fd683 William Hubbs posted on Wed, 13 Apr 2011 14:58:51 -0500 as excerpted: > On Wed, Apr 13, 2011 at 08:41:16PM +0200, "Pawe?? Hajdan, Jr." wrote: >> On 4/13/11 8:15 PM, William Hubbs wrote: >> > The baselayout package provides files which all systems must have in >> > order to function properly. You are currently using version 1.x, >> > which has several issues. The most significant of these is that the >> > included init system is written entirely in bash, which makes it slo= w >> > and not very flexable. >>=20 >> I think it would be worth it to mention other problems too (just a lis= t >> of most important bugs if that makes sense). >=20 > Does anyone on the list have any particular suggestions for what should > be mentioned? The definition of "important" might vary per person, but, while it has=20 been awhile since I ran baselayout-1, here's what I recall that I'd=20 consider significant. 1) While baselayout-1 had a parallel boot option, it was quite broken and= =20 (partly or entirely, not sure which) non-functional. The same thing in=20 baselayout-2/openrc works WELL and I use it all the time. (Given the=20 emphasis placed on this in the media, the various boot-timing contests,=20 etc, and the fact that this feature puts Gentoo in-play again in regard t= o=20 speed-boots, it's a pretty big positive in favor of upgrading.) 2) In baselayout-1, the early-boot wasn't actually dependency based, but=20 rather, was strict-serial-order based on a list of IIRC four services=20 started in the exact order they were listed. (clock or whatever the=20 baselayout-1 name was, was one of them, IDR the others). OpenRC/ baselayout-2 is fully dependency based at every stage. I mentioned both of these points earlier in a different context. FWIW/IMHO, I don't believe the news item needs mentioning that it was bas= h=20 that made it slow and inflexible. Most users don't so much care whether=20 it's C or bash or java that made it so, only that it was. I'd personally= =20 put more emphasis on the /how/ instead of the /why/, as I believe that's=20 what most users want to know. The above two points support that, thus,=20 reworking that whole bit: """ You are currently using version 1.x, which was slow and inflexible. It=20 was slow in part because the parallel boot option was broken, and=20 inflexible in part because dependencies didn't work until later in the=20 boot process, so the first few services had to be started in order=20 according to an arbitrary list. """ No mention of bash as a reason because that's an internal implementation=20 deal I as an admin don't want or need to care about. What difference wil= l=20 it make in the way my system boots and how will that be better, that's=20 what I as an admin want to know. (That said, the above can surely be improved as well. The ideas conveyed= =20 are better I believe, more direct to what a Gentoo user/admin will likely= =20 want to know, but I'm my wording isn't right, yet.) --=20 Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman