Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Todd Goodman]

* Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> [110510 17:29]:
> Hi folks,
> 
> I was curious, what's the results of the openrc update for people that 
> have done theirs?  Is it pretty simple and "just works" or are there 
> issues?  I'm mostly interested in x86 and amd64 since that is what I 
> have.  Just a simple works here and I'm X86 or amd64 would be nice.  
> List issues if you had any.
> 
> Thanks for the feedback.
> 
> Dale
> 
> :-)  :-)

Hi Dale,

I did it previously on a couple ~x86 machines and now on a couple x86
machines haven't had any problems at all.

Todd

[gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Dale]

Hi folks,

I was curious, what's the results of the openrc update for people that 
have done theirs?  Is it pretty simple and "just works" or are there 
issues?  I'm mostly interested in x86 and amd64 since that is what I 
have.  Just a simple works here and I'm X86 or amd64 would be nice.  
List issues if you had any.

Thanks for the feedback.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Alan McKinnon]

Apparently, though unproven, at 23:55 on Tuesday 10 May 2011, Dale did opine 
thusly:

> Hi folks,
> 
> I was curious, what's the results of the openrc update for people that
> have done theirs?  Is it pretty simple and "just works" or are there
> issues?  I'm mostly interested in x86 and amd64 since that is what I
> have.  Just a simple works here and I'm X86 or amd64 would be nice.
> List issues if you had any.


Been using it for, oh I dunno - ages?, on a variety of x86 and amd64 machines. 
All bar one were clean installs, the one - this very notebook - was a 
migration.

Does it work? Well, you've been reading my posts all this time so the 
migration couldn't have been catastrophic :-)

It was a PITA at the time, having to go through conf.d and fiddle each one to 
be conformant. But once complete, it was a reboot and JustWorks(tm)


-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Paul Hartman]

On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 4:55 PM, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I was curious, what's the results of the openrc update for people that have
> done theirs?  Is it pretty simple and "just works" or are there issues?  I'm
> mostly interested in x86 and amd64 since that is what I have.  Just a simple
> works here and I'm X86 or amd64 would be nice.  List issues if you had any.

I'm using ~amd64 and upgraded long, long, long ago. No problems at all
during or after the upgrade. I would expect it to be even smoother
process now than it was then.

IIRC the biggest deal with the baselayout/openrc upgrade was that you
must update a bunch of config files, which are not necessarily all
blind/trivial updates. Failing to update them could make rebooting a
sad experience.

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Alex Schuster]

Dale writes:

> I was curious, what's the results of the openrc update for people that 
> have done theirs?  Is it pretty simple and "just works" or are there 
> issues?  I'm mostly interested in x86 and amd64 since that is what I 
> have.  Just a simple works here and I'm X86 or amd64 would be nice.  
> List issues if you had any.

I switched my main system about at least a year ago (and later on some
mor emachines), and it was without trouble. Be sure to update your
config files. The howto even had some points in it that it told had to
be done (I think adding init services to runlevels), but they were
somehow performed automagically.

Only slight problem I noticed: my file systems are being checked for the
need to be fscked for two times when booting. If a fsck is started, the
first one can be aborted with Ctrl-C as it used to be, the 2nd one
cannnot, which can be annoying if the partition is very large and I want
to use the PC _now_. I did not investigate this further, whether
/etc/init.d/fsck is called for two times or what. I thought it had to do
with all my partitions being on LUKS, but I don't even remember why I
thought this.

Anyway, I think the update is quite safe when you follow the instructions.

	Wonko

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Florian Philipp]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 800 bytes --]

Am 10.05.2011 23:55, schrieb Dale:
> Hi folks,
> 
> I was curious, what's the results of the openrc update for people that
> have done theirs?  Is it pretty simple and "just works" or are there
> issues?  I'm mostly interested in x86 and amd64 since that is what I
> have.  Just a simple works here and I'm X86 or amd64 would be nice. 
> List issues if you had any.
> 
> Thanks for the feedback.
> 
> Dale
> 
> :-)  :-)
> 

I've followed the official documentation and had no problems. Well ... I
sometimes had a problem with a parts of /etc/rc.conf being ignored but
that is specific to my fiddling with it and I've never tracked it down
far enough to open a bug for it.

All at all, I don't think you have to expect trouble as long as you rtfm.

Regards,
Florian Philipp


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 262 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Dale]

Alex Schuster wrote:
>
> Anyway, I think the update is quite safe when you follow the instructions.
>
> 	Wonko
>
>    

After the mess I had with hal and xorg, I hope it is safe.  ;-)

Thanks to all for the replies.  I'm going to back up my /etc directory 
and give it a whirl.  If it gives me problems, I'll be back looking like 
this:  :-@

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[covici]

Paul Hartman <paul.hartman+gentoo@gmail.com> wrote:

> On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 4:55 PM, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > I was curious, what's the results of the openrc update for people that have
> > done theirs?  Is it pretty simple and "just works" or are there issues?  I'm
> > mostly interested in x86 and amd64 since that is what I have.  Just a simple
> > works here and I'm X86 or amd64 would be nice.  List issues if you had any.
> 
> I'm using ~amd64 and upgraded long, long, long ago. No problems at all
> during or after the upgrade. I would expect it to be even smoother
> process now than it was then.
> 
> IIRC the biggest deal with the baselayout/openrc upgrade was that you
> must update a bunch of config files, which are not necessarily all
> blind/trivial updates. Failing to update them could make rebooting a
> sad experience.
> 

I can say the same -- I am using ~x64 and was using ~x86 at the time,
and had no problems switching over.

-- 
Your life is like a penny.  You're going to lose it.  The question is:
How do
you spend it?

         John Covici
         covici@ccs.covici.com

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 269 bytes --]

On Tue, 10 May 2011 18:10:40 -0500, Dale wrote:

> After the mess I had with hal and xorg, I hope it is safe.  ;-)

Of course it is, but so was hal and xorg for the rest of us :-/


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Anything worth fighting for is worth fighting dirty for.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Dale]

Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Tue, 10 May 2011 18:10:40 -0500, Dale wrote:
>
>    
>> After the mess I had with hal and xorg, I hope it is safe.  ;-)
>>      
> Of course it is, but so was hal and xorg for the rest of us :-/
>
>
>    

Well some seemed to have no issues with it and just changing the USE 
flags was it.  Not for me tho.  Got locked out of my own system with no 
mouse or keyboard.  I never did get that thing to work either.

This however seems to have worked.  I emerged them, ran etc-update which 
had a LOT of updates, went through the guide and edited a few things and 
rebooted.  I can't say it was any faster tho.  It stopped at one point, 
which worried me at first, then carried on.  I'm not sure what it 
stopped on tho.  Maybe it was a one time thing.

What do you know, I upgraded and it worked.  Now if I can just get rid 
of this Nepomuk thingy that pops up a bit after I login to KDE.  Makes 
me want to get a fly flap and beat on the message.  lol  It bugs me.  
Get it?

Thanks for the replies.  Sort of helped me decide when to do this.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Adam Carter]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 519 bytes --]

>
> I was curious, what's the results of the openrc update for people that have
> done theirs?  Is it pretty simple and "just works" or are there issues?  I'm
> mostly interested in x86 and amd64 since that is what I have.  Just a simple
> works here and I'm X86 or amd64 would be nice.  List issues if you had any.
>

IMO if you read the guide through before starting, and follow it during
implementation, you will be fine.
http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/openrc-migration.xml

That is, it works if you do it properly :)

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 781 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Manuel McLure]

On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
> I was curious, what's the results of the openrc update for people that have
> done theirs?  Is it pretty simple and "just works" or are there issues?  I'm
> mostly interested in x86 and amd64 since that is what I have.  Just a simple
> works here and I'm X86 or amd64 would be nice.  List issues if you had any.

On my dedicated MythTV box, the major problem I had was that neither
net.eth0 nor net.eth1 started up once I deleted /etc/conf.d/rc and
went to /etc/rc.conf. This is possibly due to the hotplug settings
which IMHO weren't clear in /etc/rc.conf. Fixed by simply adding
net.eth0 and net.eth1 to the default runlevel and everything is fine
now.

I think that a guide specifying exactly how to migrate from
/etc/conf.d/rc to rc.conf, setting by setting, would be good. "Please
read through /etc/rc.conf and /etc/conf.d/rc and migrate the settings"
doesn't cut it when the syntax and semantics of some settings are so
different. Also, I'm accustomed to having configuration files show the
default value commented out, but for example in this case the
commented out value was

#rc_hotplug="*"

which was the exact opposite of the default which is "!*".
-- 
Manuel A. McLure WW1FA <manuel@mclure.org> <http://www.mclure.org>
...for in Ulthar, according to an ancient and significant law,
no man may kill a cat.                       -- H.P. Lovecraft

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Leonardo Guilherme]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1579 bytes --]

Works without a flaw. x86 here.

Leonardo


2011/5/10 Manuel McLure <manuel@mclure.org>

> On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
> > I was curious, what's the results of the openrc update for people that
> have
> > done theirs?  Is it pretty simple and "just works" or are there issues?
>  I'm
> > mostly interested in x86 and amd64 since that is what I have.  Just a
> simple
> > works here and I'm X86 or amd64 would be nice.  List issues if you had
> any.
>
> On my dedicated MythTV box, the major problem I had was that neither
> net.eth0 nor net.eth1 started up once I deleted /etc/conf.d/rc and
> went to /etc/rc.conf. This is possibly due to the hotplug settings
> which IMHO weren't clear in /etc/rc.conf. Fixed by simply adding
> net.eth0 and net.eth1 to the default runlevel and everything is fine
> now.
>
> I think that a guide specifying exactly how to migrate from
> /etc/conf.d/rc to rc.conf, setting by setting, would be good. "Please
> read through /etc/rc.conf and /etc/conf.d/rc and migrate the settings"
> doesn't cut it when the syntax and semantics of some settings are so
> different. Also, I'm accustomed to having configuration files show the
> default value commented out, but for example in this case the
> commented out value was
>
> #rc_hotplug="*"
>
> which was the exact opposite of the default which is "!*".
> --
> Manuel A. McLure WW1FA <manuel@mclure.org> <http://www.mclure.org>
> ...for in Ulthar, according to an ancient and significant law,
> no man may kill a cat.                       -- H.P. Lovecraft
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2228 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Indi]

On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 12:20:02AM +0200, Paul Hartman wrote:
> On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 4:55 PM, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> > I was curious, what's the results of the openrc update for people that have
> > done theirs?  Is it pretty simple and "just works" or are there issues?  I'm
> > mostly interested in x86 and amd64 since that is what I have.  Just a simple
> > works here and I'm X86 or amd64 would be nice.  List issues if you had any.
> 
> I'm using ~amd64 and upgraded long, long, long ago. No problems at all
> during or after the upgrade. I would expect it to be even smoother
> process now than it was then.
> 
> IIRC the biggest deal with the baselayout/openrc upgrade was that you
> must update a bunch of config files, which are not necessarily all
> blind/trivial updates. Failing to update them could make rebooting a
> sad experience.

Same here, on x86 and ppc. Most of it was handled automatically and 
the rest via dispatch-conf. Works just fine.

-- 
caveat utilitor

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Walter Dnes]

On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 04:55:01PM -0500, Dale wrote
> Hi folks,
> 
> I was curious, what's the results of the openrc update for people that 
> have done theirs?  Is it pretty simple and "just works" or are there 
> issues?  I'm mostly interested in x86 and amd64 since that is what I 
> have.  Just a simple works here and I'm X86 or amd64 would be nice.  
> List issues if you had any.

  I had one syntax error that totally broke networking on my amd64
stable..  Fortunately, I hadn't upgrade my hot backup machine <G>.  I
had simply removed the bash parentheses in /etc/conf.d/net and got...

config_eth0=
"192.168.123.249/29 broadcast 192.168.123.255 mtu 1454
169.254.1.3/16 broadcast 169.254.255.255"
routes_eth0=
"default via 192.168.123.254 metric 2
192.168.123.248/29 via 192.168.123.254 metric 0
169.254.0.0/16 via 169.254.1.3 metric 0"

  The result was "no network for you".  Moving the opening quote to
immediately after the equals sign (for both config_eth0 and routes_eth0)
fixed that, like so...

config_eth0="
192.168.123.249/29 broadcast 192.168.123.255 mtu 1454
169.254.1.3/16 broadcast 169.254.255.255"
routes_eth0="
default via 192.168.123.254 metric 2
192.168.123.248/29 via 192.168.123.254 metric 0
169.254.0.0/16 via 169.254.1.3 metric 0"

  A big thank you to William Hubbs for spotting that error.

-- 
Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org>

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Jim Burwell]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1865 bytes --]

On 5/10/2011 18:25, Indi wrote:
> On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 12:20:02AM +0200, Paul Hartman wrote:
>> On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 4:55 PM, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi folks,
>>>
>>> I was curious, what's the results of the openrc update for people that have
>>> done theirs?  Is it pretty simple and "just works" or are there issues?  I'm
>>> mostly interested in x86 and amd64 since that is what I have.  Just a simple
>>> works here and I'm X86 or amd64 would be nice.  List issues if you had any.
>> I'm using ~amd64 and upgraded long, long, long ago. No problems at all
>> during or after the upgrade. I would expect it to be even smoother
>> process now than it was then.
>>
>> IIRC the biggest deal with the baselayout/openrc upgrade was that you
>> must update a bunch of config files, which are not necessarily all
>> blind/trivial updates. Failing to update them could make rebooting a
>> sad experience.
> Same here, on x86 and ppc. Most of it was handled automatically and 
> the rest via dispatch-conf. Works just fine.
>
Went pretty smoothly for me following the upgrade guide.  I have a
gentoo based iptables firewall with a fairly complicated network setup
with postup()  functions.  I made the mistake of taking out the BASH
syntax (the surrounding parens, etc) on my postup() function based on
the guide, wondering if it'd work or not, and sure enough it wanted the
old BASH style syntax for those functions, but the new style (w/o
parens, and quoted blocks with CRs) on the "normal" sections.

They should probably make a note of this in the config guide.

It's good to see they added in support for iproute2 rules natively
instead of requiring a postup() function.  I'd like to see them add a
similar functionality for adding static ARP entries too (right now using
my own postup() for that).

-Jim



[-- Attachment #2: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature --]
[-- Type: application/pkcs7-signature, Size: 5117 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Walter Dnes]

  Possibly one more problem, rdate seems to have stopped working for me.
I've opened a separate thread on that.

-- 
Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org>

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Dale]

Dale wrote:
>
> Well some seemed to have no issues with it and just changing the USE 
> flags was it.  Not for me tho.  Got locked out of my own system with 
> no mouse or keyboard.  I never did get that thing to work either.
>
> This however seems to have worked.  I emerged them, ran etc-update 
> which had a LOT of updates, went through the guide and edited a few 
> things and rebooted.  I can't say it was any faster tho.  It stopped 
> at one point, which worried me at first, then carried on.  I'm not 
> sure what it stopped on tho.  Maybe it was a one time thing.
>
> What do you know, I upgraded and it worked.  Now if I can just get rid 
> of this Nepomuk thingy that pops up a bit after I login to KDE.  Makes 
> me want to get a fly flap and beat on the message.  lol  It bugs me.  
> Get it?
>
> Thanks for the replies.  Sort of helped me decide when to do this.
>
> Dale
>
> :-)  :-)
>

I noticed something . . . odd.  Sometimes when I do upgrades to some 
packages, I go to single user, check what processes are still running 
and kill strays, then go back to the default run level and login.  I 
just updated a lot of KDE related stuff and went to single user.  When 
it says single user, it ain't kidding.  It even unmounts file systems.  
Oook.  That's weird.  It didn't do that before.  :/  Then when I wanted 
to go back to the default run level and typed in rc default & exit, it 
logged me out which is normal but nothing scrolled up like it did in the 
old baselayout.  The screen went blank and a bit later the KDM screen 
came up.  It used to be that it logged me out and then I saw all the 
services scrolling up until kdm started.

Is this the new normal?  Should I not do the exit thing now?

One good thing I noticed, KDE used to have a LOT of dead processes 
running after logging out, even after going to single user.  Lots of 
kdeinit and knotify stuff.  It seems to close out a LOT cleaner.  On my 
first time going single user, it was clean as a whistle.  I didn't see a 
single stray process in the bunch.  Neato !!

Thanks.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[justin]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2044 bytes --]

On 11/05/11 04:07, Jim Burwell wrote:
> On 5/10/2011 18:25, Indi wrote:
>> On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 12:20:02AM +0200, Paul Hartman wrote:
>>> On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 4:55 PM, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi folks,
>>>>
>>>> I was curious, what's the results of the openrc update for people that have
>>>> done theirs?  Is it pretty simple and "just works" or are there issues?  I'm
>>>> mostly interested in x86 and amd64 since that is what I have.  Just a simple
>>>> works here and I'm X86 or amd64 would be nice.  List issues if you had any.
>>> I'm using ~amd64 and upgraded long, long, long ago. No problems at all
>>> during or after the upgrade. I would expect it to be even smoother
>>> process now than it was then.
>>>
>>> IIRC the biggest deal with the baselayout/openrc upgrade was that you
>>> must update a bunch of config files, which are not necessarily all
>>> blind/trivial updates. Failing to update them could make rebooting a
>>> sad experience.
>> Same here, on x86 and ppc. Most of it was handled automatically and 
>> the rest via dispatch-conf. Works just fine.
>>
> Went pretty smoothly for me following the upgrade guide.  I have a
> gentoo based iptables firewall with a fairly complicated network setup
> with postup()  functions.  I made the mistake of taking out the BASH
> syntax (the surrounding parens, etc) on my postup() function based on
> the guide, wondering if it'd work or not, and sure enough it wanted the
> old BASH style syntax for those functions, but the new style (w/o
> parens, and quoted blocks with CRs) on the "normal" sections.
> 
> They should probably make a note of this in the config guide.
> 
> It's good to see they added in support for iproute2 rules natively
> instead of requiring a postup() function.  I'd like to see them add a
> similar functionality for adding static ARP entries too (right now using
> my own postup() for that).
> 

Just file a request on bugzilla. They have to know what you like to have
included.

justin


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 262 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Mick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 2100 bytes --]

On Wednesday 11 May 2011 03:07:32 Jim Burwell wrote:
> On 5/10/2011 18:25, Indi wrote:
> > On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 12:20:02AM +0200, Paul Hartman wrote:
> >> On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 4:55 PM, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> Hi folks,
> >>> 
> >>> I was curious, what's the results of the openrc update for people that
> >>> have done theirs?  Is it pretty simple and "just works" or are there
> >>> issues?  I'm mostly interested in x86 and amd64 since that is what I
> >>> have.  Just a simple works here and I'm X86 or amd64 would be nice. 
> >>> List issues if you had any.
> >> 
> >> I'm using ~amd64 and upgraded long, long, long ago. No problems at all
> >> during or after the upgrade. I would expect it to be even smoother
> >> process now than it was then.
> >> 
> >> IIRC the biggest deal with the baselayout/openrc upgrade was that you
> >> must update a bunch of config files, which are not necessarily all
> >> blind/trivial updates. Failing to update them could make rebooting a
> >> sad experience.
> > 
> > Same here, on x86 and ppc. Most of it was handled automatically and
> > the rest via dispatch-conf. Works just fine.
> 
> Went pretty smoothly for me following the upgrade guide.  I have a
> gentoo based iptables firewall with a fairly complicated network setup
> with postup()  functions.  I made the mistake of taking out the BASH
> syntax (the surrounding parens, etc) on my postup() function based on
> the guide, wondering if it'd work or not, and sure enough it wanted the
> old BASH style syntax for those functions, but the new style (w/o
> parens, and quoted blocks with CRs) on the "normal" sections.
> 
> They should probably make a note of this in the config guide.
> 
> It's good to see they added in support for iproute2 rules natively
> instead of requiring a postup() function.  I'd like to see them add a
> similar functionality for adding static ARP entries too (right now using
> my own postup() for that).

Jim, it's a good idea to post a bug so that they can change the documentation.

-- 
Regards,
Mick

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Philip Webb]

110510 Dale wrote:
> what's the results of the openrc update for people that have done theirs?

On amd64 here no problem, despite being half-asleep at the time.
It worried at the 2nd line of Init msgs that I hadn't set  rc_sys ,
but that was fixed when I uncommented the default  ""  in  /etc/rc.conf .
It's still worrying at shut-down that  /tmp  is in use when unmounting,
but re-assures itself that Fuser can't find any offending file.

Boot time -- 'Enter' in Lilo to login prompt in raw terminal --
has dropped  c 25 -> 15 s , a very noticeable improvement;
part of that is no delay now starting Eth0 (presumably C has replaced Bash).

-- 
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT     ___________//___,   Philip Webb
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|   Cities Centre, University of Toronto
TRANSIT    `-O----------O---'   purslowatchassdotutorontodotca

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Dale]

Philip Webb wrote:
> 110510 Dale wrote:
>    
>> what's the results of the openrc update for people that have done theirs?
>>      
> On amd64 here no problem, despite being half-asleep at the time.
> It worried at the 2nd line of Init msgs that I hadn't set  rc_sys ,
> but that was fixed when I uncommented the default  ""  in  /etc/rc.conf .
> It's still worrying at shut-down that  /tmp  is in use when unmounting,
> but re-assures itself that Fuser can't find any offending file.
>
> Boot time -- 'Enter' in Lilo to login prompt in raw terminal --
> has dropped  c 25 ->  15 s , a very noticeable improvement;
> part of that is no delay now starting Eth0 (presumably C has replaced Bash).
>
>    

I had noticed that my eth0 was slow to start but not always.  I'm not 
sure why it took so long but it did eventually come up.  It's connected 
by wire to a LinkSys router and most of the time, it comes up quickly 
but on occasion, it decides to take a while.

That is a good speed improvement.  I didn't notice much difference here 
tho.  Do you, or anyone else, have the parallel startup enabled?  I 
started to but noticed the warning in the config file.  Goes like this:

"# WARNING: whilst we have improved parallel, it can still potentially lock
# the boot process. Don't file bugs about this unless you can supply
# patches that fix it without breaking other things!
#rc_parallel="NO""

Sort of curious if anyone uses it and have had theirs to lock up during 
the boot up.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Jacques Montier]

Le 10/05/2011 23:55, Dale a écrit :
> Hi folks,
>
> I was curious, what's the results of the openrc update for people that
> have done theirs?  Is it pretty simple and "just works" or are there
> issues?  I'm mostly interested in x86 and amd64 since that is what I
> have.  Just a simple works here and I'm X86 or amd64 would be nice. 
> List issues if you had any.
>
> Thanks for the feedback.
>
> Dale
>
> :-)  :-)
>

Hi all,

After openrc and baselayout update, then RTFM, everything works fine
with amd64.

Cheers,

--
Jacques

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Philip Webb]

110511 Dale wrote:
> Do you, or anyone else, have the parallel startup enabled?
> I started to but noticed the warning in the config file.

No & for the same reason as yourself.

-- 
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT     ___________//___,   Philip Webb
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|   Cities Centre, University of Toronto
TRANSIT    `-O----------O---'   purslowatchassdotutorontodotca

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 444 bytes --]

On Wed, 11 May 2011 01:55:05 -0500, Dale wrote:

>  Do you, or anyone else, have the parallel startup enabled?  I 
> started to but noticed the warning in the config file.

I've tried it in the past. I didn't notice any massive speedup, but no
problems either, except that that the init messages aren't as nice,
especially when it stops to ask for my LUKS password.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

It's not who you know; it's whom you know.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Dale]

Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Wed, 11 May 2011 01:55:05 -0500, Dale wrote:
>
>    
>>   Do you, or anyone else, have the parallel startup enabled?  I
>> started to but noticed the warning in the config file.
>>      
> I've tried it in the past. I didn't notice any massive speedup, but no
> problems either, except that that the init messages aren't as nice,
> especially when it stops to ask for my LUKS password.
>
>    

I used it a long time ago on my old x86 machine.  I couldn't tell much 
difference either.  I didn't time it or anything but still.

I'll leave it like it is I guess.  I like all the little green OK's that 
scroll up anyway.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 272 bytes --]

On Wed, 11 May 2011 04:55:46 -0500, Dale wrote:

> I'll leave it like it is I guess.  I like all the little green OK's
> that scroll up anyway.

Reassuring, aren't they?


-- 
Neil Bothwick

"Meow" <SPLAT!>  "Woof" <SPLAT!>    Jeez, it's really raining today.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Dale]

Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Wed, 11 May 2011 04:55:46 -0500, Dale wrote:
>
>    
>> I'll leave it like it is I guess.  I like all the little green OK's
>> that scroll up anyway.
>>      
> Reassuring, aren't they?
>
>
>    

What's bad is when something doesn't start for some reason and you don't 
know it didn't start.  Then things start acting weird and you get a head 
scratcher.  It's one reason I don't like the picture stuff that some 
people use that covers all that up.  Even when I boot off a USB stick or 
CD, I hit F2 or whatever to see if everything I need is seen and ready.

I wish they had a guide that points out the differences between the old 
way and the new ways.  I'm sort of poking around to see what all has 
changed.  The rc stuff changed for sure.  Some for the better tho.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Fernando Antunes]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 740 bytes --]

On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 6:55 PM, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi folks,
>
> I was curious, what's the results of the openrc update for people that have
> done theirs?  Is it pretty simple and "just works" or are there issues?  I'm
> mostly interested in x86 and amd64 since that is what I have.  Just a simple
> works here and I'm X86 or amd64 would be nice.  List issues if you had any.
>
>   It worket fine. I only lost my /etc/hosts file configuration on the
process. Probably my fault when a ran etc-update.

 I noticed a " rc_sys not configured in rc.conf message during the boot,
using automatic ... "  . Is commented rc_sys in rc.conf the default
configuration expected ?

Thanks for the feedback.
>
> Dale
>
> :-)  :-)
>
>

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1234 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Alan Mackenzie]

Hi, Dale.

On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 04:55:01PM -0500, Dale wrote:
> Hi folks,

> I was curious, what's the results of the openrc update for people that
> have done theirs?  Is it pretty simple and "just works" or are there
> issues?  I'm mostly interested in x86 and amd64 since that is what I
> have.  Just a simple works here and I'm X86 or amd64 would be nice.
> List issues if you had any.

For me, it just worked.  But it took me well over two hours, and that was
after spending several hours studying the FM (practically memorising it,
actually).  Things which threaten to make my PC unbootable have that
effect on me.

I was surprised by the number of config files which had changed (though
I was surprised not to see inittab amongst them).  I had a few problems
with consolefont and keymaps, but that probably had to do with my
converting from ISO-8859-1 to UTF-8 the day before.

I take my hat off to Christian Faulhammer and William Hubbs, true
gentlemen, who took so much trouble to make a difficult transition so
smooth and easy.

> Thanks for the feedback.

> Dale

> :-)  :-)

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Felix Leif Keppmann]

No issues, followed the guide, everything working.

Felix Leif


On Tuesday 10 May 2011 16:55:01 Dale wrote:
> Hi folks,
> 
> I was curious, what's the results of the openrc update for people that
> have done theirs?  Is it pretty simple and "just works" or are there
> issues?  I'm mostly interested in x86 and amd64 since that is what I
> have.  Just a simple works here and I'm X86 or amd64 would be nice.
> List issues if you had any.
> 
> Thanks for the feedback.
> 
> Dale
> 
> :-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Dale]

Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> Hi, Dale.
>
> On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 04:55:01PM -0500, Dale wrote:
>    
>> Hi folks,
>>      
>    
>> I was curious, what's the results of the openrc update for people that
>> have done theirs?  Is it pretty simple and "just works" or are there
>> issues?  I'm mostly interested in x86 and amd64 since that is what I
>> have.  Just a simple works here and I'm X86 or amd64 would be nice.
>> List issues if you had any.
>>      
> For me, it just worked.  But it took me well over two hours, and that was
> after spending several hours studying the FM (practically memorising it,
> actually).  Things which threaten to make my PC unbootable have that
> effect on me.
>
> I was surprised by the number of config files which had changed (though
> I was surprised not to see inittab amongst them).  I had a few problems
> with consolefont and keymaps, but that probably had to do with my
> converting from ISO-8859-1 to UTF-8 the day before.
>
> I take my hat off to Christian Faulhammer and William Hubbs, true
> gentlemen, who took so much trouble to make a difficult transition so
> smooth and easy.
>
>    
>> Thanks for the feedback.
>>      
>    
>> Dale
>>      
>    
>> :-)  :-)
>>      

After reading some replies here, I did mine.  It went well.  I agree, 
hats off to the folks who worked on this.  Seems like their work paid 
off very well.  I just hope everyone else's is as easy as mine.

There was a LOT of config files to update.  It appears that a LOT of it 
was done during the update tho.

I'm just glad this is done.  Sort of been dreading this.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Kfir Lavi]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 545 bytes --]

On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 12:55 AM, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi folks,
>
> I was curious, what's the results of the openrc update for people that have
> done theirs?  Is it pretty simple and "just works" or are there issues?  I'm
> mostly interested in x86 and amd64 since that is what I have.  Just a simple
> works here and I'm X86 or amd64 would be nice.  List issues if you had any.
>
> Thanks for the feedback.
>
> Dale
>
> :-)  :-)
>
>
I had a problem with bonding.sh script.
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=366653

Kfir

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 990 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Gregory Shearman]

Dale wrote: 
> Neil Bothwick wrote:
>> On Wed, 11 May 2011 04:55:46 -0500, Dale wrote:
>>
>>    
>>> I'll leave it like it is I guess.  I like all the little green OK's
>>> that scroll up anyway.
>>>      
>> Reassuring, aren't they?
>>
>>
>>    
>
> What's bad is when something doesn't start for some reason and you don't 
> know it didn't start.  Then things start acting weird and you get a head 
> scratcher.  It's one reason I don't like the picture stuff that some 
> people use that covers all that up.  Even when I boot off a USB stick or 
> CD, I hit F2 or whatever to see if everything I need is seen and ready.

The "picture stuff" will switch to "verbose" if there's any errors in
the bootup process, otherwise it's a nice graphical bootscreen and a
progress bar.

-- 
Regards,
Gregory.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Indi]

On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 04:50:02PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> 
> It uses hardly any cpu at all, regardless of what the naysayers say. 
> 

Well, add me to the "naysayers" list then, because my experience directly
contradicts that statement. Much happier with fluxbox, completely finished 
fooling with the kde.

I still don't understand why the kde folks went from something that
worked extremely well to their current state. Baffling.

-- 
caveat utilitor

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Mark Knecht]

On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I was curious, what's the results of the openrc update for people that have
> done theirs?  Is it pretty simple and "just works" or are there issues?  I'm
> mostly interested in x86 and amd64 since that is what I have.  Just a simple
> works here and I'm X86 or amd64 would be nice.  List issues if you had any.
>
> Thanks for the feedback.
>
> Dale
>
> :-)  :-)

Hi Dale,
   I've now done 5 stable machines - 4 hardware and 1 VM. I haven't
had any significant problems on any of them. The update takes well
less that 30 minutes and, for me anyway, has been relatively pain free
compared to other historic Gentoo upgrades.

Cheers,
Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Alan McKinnon]

Apparently, though unproven, at 17:06 on Wednesday 11 May 2011, Indi did opine 
thusly:

> On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 04:50:02PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > It uses hardly any cpu at all, regardless of what the naysayers say.
> 
> Well, add me to the "naysayers" list then, because my experience directly
> contradicts that statement. Much happier with fluxbox, completely finished
> fooling with the kde.

semantic desktop equates to nepomuk

If you do something really thick with the backend (virtuoso currently) it will 
go beserk. Full strigi indexing will keep your disk busy all day - what else 
could it do if you want a full text indexed search of 300GB of file in ~ like 
many users have these days?

> I still don't understand why the kde folks went from something that
> worked extremely well to their current state. Baffling.

KDE3 and KDE4 are not the same thing. 
KDE4 is not the next version of KDE3.

You must consider KDE4 to be a completely new product, unrelated to KDE3 in 
any meaningful way except that many KDE4 devs used to work on a different 
project called KDE3.

Like all software, KDE4 is not for everyone - like you for example. But 
there's nothing stopping you from maintaining KDE3 yourself.

Why did the devs switch? Market pressures really. If you don't spot emerging 
trends and follow them early, you run the risk of becoming redundant very 
quickly. Ask Microsoft, they know all about this.

They went from the undisputed behemoth market leader to staring the very real 
threat of total obsolescence in three very short years.

KDE devs decided to take the risk and make the jump ahead of the curve.

-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Dale]

Mark Knecht wrote:
> On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Dale<rdalek1967@gmail.com>  wrote:
>    
>> Hi folks,
>>
>> I was curious, what's the results of the openrc update for people that have
>> done theirs?  Is it pretty simple and "just works" or are there issues?  I'm
>> mostly interested in x86 and amd64 since that is what I have.  Just a simple
>> works here and I'm X86 or amd64 would be nice.  List issues if you had any.
>>
>> Thanks for the feedback.
>>
>> Dale
>>
>> :-)  :-)
>>      
> Hi Dale,
>     I've now done 5 stable machines - 4 hardware and 1 VM. I haven't
> had any significant problems on any of them. The update takes well
> less that 30 minutes and, for me anyway, has been relatively pain free
> compared to other historic Gentoo upgrades.
>
> Cheers,
> Mark
>
>    

Yep.  I agree.  Of all the things that have caused problems in the past, 
this was a doozy.  It had the potential to really bork a system.  It 
appears to have been a very easy one.  I don't think anyone had a REALLY 
big problem with this upgrade.  The devs made sure all the ducks was in 
line on this one.  Yeppie for that.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[James Wall]

On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 10:55 AM, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
> Mark Knecht wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 2:55 PM, Dale<rdalek1967@gmail.com>  wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> Hi folks,
>>>
>>> I was curious, what's the results of the openrc update for people that
>>> have
>>> done theirs?  Is it pretty simple and "just works" or are there issues?
>>>  I'm
>>> mostly interested in x86 and amd64 since that is what I have.  Just a
>>> simple
>>> works here and I'm X86 or amd64 would be nice.  List issues if you had
>>> any.
>>>
>>> Thanks for the feedback.
>>>
>>> Dale
>>>
>>> :-)  :-)
>>>
>>
>> Hi Dale,
>>    I've now done 5 stable machines - 4 hardware and 1 VM. I haven't
>> had any significant problems on any of them. The update takes well
>> less that 30 minutes and, for me anyway, has been relatively pain free
>> compared to other historic Gentoo upgrades.
>>
>> Cheers,
>> Mark
>>
>>
>
> Yep.  I agree.  Of all the things that have caused problems in the past,
> this was a doozy.  It had the potential to really bork a system.  It appears
> to have been a very easy one.  I don't think anyone had a REALLY big problem
> with this upgrade.  The devs made sure all the ducks was in line on this
> one.  Yeppie for that.
>
> Dale
>
> :-)  :-)
>
>

I remember expat and e2fsprogs breaking spectacularly with no warning
whatsoever back when....
That was fun. This update is a complete opposite from those nightmares.

James Wall

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[BRM]

----- Original Message ----

> From: Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@gmail.com>
> > I still don't understand why the kde folks went from something  that
> > worked extremely well to their current state. Baffling.
> 
> KDE3  and KDE4 are not the same thing. 
> KDE4 is not the next version of  KDE3.
> 
> You must consider KDE4 to be a completely new product, unrelated to  KDE3 in 
> any meaningful way except that many KDE4 devs used to work on a  different 
> project called KDE3.
> 
> Like all software, KDE4 is not for  everyone - like you for example. But 
> there's nothing stopping you from  maintaining KDE3 yourself.
> 
> Why did the devs switch? Market pressures  really. If you don't spot emerging 
> trends and follow them early, you run the  risk of becoming redundant very 
> quickly. Ask Microsoft, they know all about  this.
> 
> They went from the undisputed behemoth market leader to staring the  very real 

> threat of total obsolescence in three very short years.
> 
> KDE  devs decided to take the risk and make the jump ahead of the curve.
> 

Very much agreed. Ever wonder why what Apple and Microsoft are doing seems to 
simply be copying what KDE did with KDE4?
Yeah - KDE is on the forefront of the desktop right now, paving the path for how 
its going to be used by essentially everyone as a result.

Ben

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Dale]

James Wall wrote:
>
> I remember expat and e2fsprogs breaking spectacularly with no warning
> whatsoever back when....
> That was fun. This update is a complete opposite from those nightmares.
>
> James Wall
>
>
>    

That was one of the ones I was thinking about.  I have to say, things in 
the dev world have improved a LOT.  The devs seem to get along better 
plus there is some really good stuff going on with portage itself.  I 
suspect one leads to the other but that's just my opinion.

I subscribe to -dev and they seem to really try to keep the users in 
mind.  I was in on the discussion about alerting users to this upgrade.  
I have to say, they did all they could to let people know this was 
coming.  It looks like it worked out well.

Let's hope all the things in the future are like this.  :-D

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Walter Dnes]

On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 05:45:07PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote

> KDE devs decided to take the risk and make the jump ahead of the curve.

  Coca Cola went from Coke Classic to New Coke; at least they had the
guts to admit that it was a bad idea, and reverse it.

  IBM walked away from their market leading AT.  Rather than put a 386
cpu on the motherboard, they went with the PS/2 design, which bombed.

  Micropro *OWNED* word-processing with a DOS-port of their cpm-based
Wordstar product.  People were begging and pleading with them to patch
it to recognize subdirectories.  Instead, Micropro dropped Wordstar, and
came up with a "user friendly" menu-driven abortion called Wordstar
2000.  That was the end.

  Do you see a pattern here?

-- 
Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org>

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Walter Dnes]

On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 10:56:05PM -0400, Walter Dnes wrote
> Possibly one more problem, rdate seems to have stopped working for me.
> I've opened a separate thread on that.

  Not really.  It seems that rdate is being dprecated in favour of NTP.
I found an rdate server, but will eventually switch to ntpd I suppose.

-- 
Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org>

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Joost Roeleveld]

On Wednesday 11 May 2011 07:27:32 Dale wrote:
> Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> > Hi, Dale.
> > 
> > On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 04:55:01PM -0500, Dale wrote:
> >> Hi folks,
> >> 
> >> 
> >> I was curious, what's the results of the openrc update for people that
> >> have done theirs?  Is it pretty simple and "just works" or are there
> >> issues?  I'm mostly interested in x86 and amd64 since that is what I
> >> have.  Just a simple works here and I'm X86 or amd64 would be nice.
> >> List issues if you had any.
> > 
> > For me, it just worked.  But it took me well over two hours, and that
> > was
> > after spending several hours studying the FM (practically memorising it,
> > actually).  Things which threaten to make my PC unbootable have that
> > effect on me.
> > 
> > I was surprised by the number of config files which had changed (though
> > I was surprised not to see inittab amongst them).  I had a few problems
> > with consolefont and keymaps, but that probably had to do with my
> > converting from ISO-8859-1 to UTF-8 the day before.
> > 
> > I take my hat off to Christian Faulhammer and William Hubbs, true
> > gentlemen, who took so much trouble to make a difficult transition so
> > smooth and easy.
> > 
> >> Thanks for the feedback.
> >> 
> >> 
> >> Dale
> >> 
> >> :-)  :-)
> 
> After reading some replies here, I did mine.  It went well.  I agree,
> hats off to the folks who worked on this.  Seems like their work paid
> off very well.  I just hope everyone else's is as easy as mine.
> 
> There was a LOT of config files to update.  It appears that a LOT of it
> was done during the update tho.
> 
> I'm just glad this is done.  Sort of been dreading this.
> 
> Dale
> 
> :-)  :-)

I actually did mine before noticing this thread and didn't actually pay much 
attention to it all.

Not had any issues and didn't need to spend much time in fixing anything. The 
only problem I had was that "/etc/init.d/eth0" had dissapeared.
That was easily fixed.

--
Joost

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Dale]

Walter Dnes wrote:
> On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 10:56:05PM -0400, Walter Dnes wrote
>    
>> Possibly one more problem, rdate seems to have stopped working for me.
>> I've opened a separate thread on that.
>>      
>    Not really.  It seems that rdate is being dprecated in favour of NTP.
> I found an rdate server, but will eventually switch to ntpd I suppose.
>
>    

If ntp gives you grief, try chrony.  I use ntp on one machine where ntp 
works well and chrony on my main rig since ntp sucks on it.  Weird but 
it works.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Dale]

Joost Roeleveld wrote:
> I actually did mine before noticing this thread and didn't actually pay much
> attention to it all.
>
> Not had any issues and didn't need to spend much time in fixing anything. The
> only problem I had was that "/etc/init.d/eth0" had dissapeared.
> That was easily fixed.
>
> --
> Joost
>
>    

Same here.  I had to recreate my link as well.  Glad it was in the guide 
tho.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Alan McKinnon]

Apparently, though unproven, at 02:40 on Thursday 12 May 2011, Walter Dnes did 
opine thusly:

> On Wed, May 11, 2011 at 05:45:07PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote
> 
> > KDE devs decided to take the risk and make the jump ahead of the curve.
> 
>   Coca Cola went from Coke Classic to New Coke; at least they had the
> guts to admit that it was a bad idea, and reverse it.
> 
>   IBM walked away from their market leading AT.  Rather than put a 386
> cpu on the motherboard, they went with the PS/2 design, which bombed.
> 
>   Micropro *OWNED* word-processing with a DOS-port of their cpm-based
> Wordstar product.  People were begging and pleading with them to patch
> it to recognize subdirectories.  Instead, Micropro dropped Wordstar, and
> came up with a "user friendly" menu-driven abortion called Wordstar
> 2000.  That was the end.
> 
>   Do you see a pattern here?


Yes. It's the pattern where you selectively cherry pick stuff that supports 
your point.

Do you *really* want to go down this road? Because that argument can't end 
well for you.



-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1549 bytes --]

On Wed, 11 May 2011 20:40:02 -0400, Walter Dnes wrote:

> > KDE devs decided to take the risk and make the jump ahead of the
> > curve.  
> 
>   Coca Cola went from Coke Classic to New Coke; at least they had the
> guts to admit that it was a bad idea, and reverse it.
> 
>   IBM walked away from their market leading AT.  Rather than put a 386
> cpu on the motherboard, they went with the PS/2 design, which bombed.
> 
>   Micropro *OWNED* word-processing with a DOS-port of their cpm-based
> Wordstar product.  People were begging and pleading with them to patch
> it to recognize subdirectories.  Instead, Micropro dropped Wordstar, and
> came up with a "user friendly" menu-driven abortion called Wordstar
> 2000.  That was the end.
> 
>   Do you see a pattern here?

The pattern I see is that of selecting only changes that failed and
implying they are the norm.

Why not add other improvements that were so bad, like the switch from
floppy disks to hard disks, or CDs to DVDs? Companies try to predict
where the market should go so they can lead. No one gets it right all
the time, the ones that survive are those that get it right often enough.
The ones that are most likely to fail are those that never try to
innovate in case someone doesn't like it.

The important point is that KDE wanted something better, it's unfortunate
that it took so much longer than planned, but it would have taken even
longer if they had not tried.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Nothing is foolproof to a sufficiently talented fool.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Joost Roeleveld]

On Thursday 12 May 2011 04:25:58 Dale wrote:
> Joost Roeleveld wrote:
> > I actually did mine before noticing this thread and didn't actually pay
> > much attention to it all.
> > 
> > Not had any issues and didn't need to spend much time in fixing
> > anything. The only problem I had was that "/etc/init.d/eth0" had
> > dissapeared.
> > That was easily fixed.
> > 
> > --
> > Joost
> 
> Same here.  I had to recreate my link as well.  Glad it was in the guide
> tho.

Yep, as I noticed after reading the guide, which was after I did the update 
without actually checking first :)

--
Joost

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Dale]

Neil Bothwick wrote:
>
> The pattern I see is that of selecting only changes that failed and
> implying they are the norm.
>
> Why not add other improvements that were so bad, like the switch from
> floppy disks to hard disks, or CDs to DVDs? Companies try to predict
> where the market should go so they can lead. No one gets it right all
> the time, the ones that survive are those that get it right often enough.
> The ones that are most likely to fail are those that never try to
> innovate in case someone doesn't like it.
>
> The important point is that KDE wanted something better, it's unfortunate
> that it took so much longer than planned, but it would have taken even
> longer if they had not tried.
>
>    

I just hope they also learned from their mistakes.  Dropping KDE3 
support long before KDE4 was ready was a big one.  That shouldn't be 
repeated.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Dale]

Joost Roeleveld wrote:
> On Thursday 12 May 2011 04:25:58 Dale wrote:
>    
>> Joost Roeleveld wrote:
>>      
>>> I actually did mine before noticing this thread and didn't actually pay
>>> much attention to it all.
>>>
>>> Not had any issues and didn't need to spend much time in fixing
>>> anything. The only problem I had was that "/etc/init.d/eth0" had
>>> dissapeared.
>>> That was easily fixed.
>>>
>>> --
>>> Joost
>>>        
>> Same here.  I had to recreate my link as well.  Glad it was in the guide
>> tho.
>>      
> Yep, as I noticed after reading the guide, which was after I did the update
> without actually checking first :)
>
> --
> Joost
>
>
>    

Hindsight.  20/20 as always.  LOL  I just wish my eyes was.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Alan McKinnon]

Apparently, though unproven, at 14:54 on Thursday 12 May 2011, Dale did opine 
thusly:

> Neil Bothwick wrote:
> > The pattern I see is that of selecting only changes that failed and
> > implying they are the norm.
> > 
> > Why not add other improvements that were so bad, like the switch from
> > floppy disks to hard disks, or CDs to DVDs? Companies try to predict
> > where the market should go so they can lead. No one gets it right all
> > the time, the ones that survive are those that get it right often enough.
> > The ones that are most likely to fail are those that never try to
> > innovate in case someone doesn't like it.
> > 
> > The important point is that KDE wanted something better, it's unfortunate
> > that it took so much longer than planned, but it would have taken even
> > longer if they had not tried.
> 
> I just hope they also learned from their mistakes.  Dropping KDE3
> support long before KDE4 was ready was a big one.  That shouldn't be
> repeated.

They can do any damn thing they want to with their code. They also you owe 
support for it in exactly the same amount you paid for it. Which is to say 
"nothing".

It's not a question of "should", it's only a question of "Dale would prefer it 
if"

-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Dale]

Alan McKinnon wrote:
> They can do any damn thing they want to with their code. They also you owe
> support for it in exactly the same amount you paid for it. Which is to say
> "nothing".
>
> It's not a question of "should", it's only a question of "Dale would prefer it
> if"
>
>    

So, you think most of the KDE users were happy to see support for KDE3 
being dropped, especially considering KDE4 was much less than stable?  
For me and a lot of others, it was worthless at first.  It was good eye 
candy but not functional even for the little I do.

Yea, it is what I want but it is also what MANY others wanted.  Some of 
those people switched to something else or still use KDE3.  It's their 
code, but if people stop using it, what is it really worth?  I'm sure 
KDE wants to gain users not piss them off and make them go away.

For me, if KDE does such a lousy switch over again, I'll be using 
something else.  Given the posts I read where others have already done 
so, I doubt I would be alone.  I'm all for second chances.  We all learn 
the hard way sometimes.  I'm just hoping KDE did.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[JDM]

Up until a few weeks ago I have never used kde opting for xfce and openbox and cannot make any comments about kde3 and upgrade. I always preferred the lighter desktops. I really like 4.x, it has lots of features and seems to me at least, very easy to use (intuitive). So perhaps the kde team will over new fans. Its oodles better than any of its contemicropories.
JDM

-----Original Message-----
From: Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 12 May 2011 08:46:32 
To: <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How's the openrc update going for everyone?

Alan McKinnon wrote:
> They can do any damn thing they want to with their code. They also you owe
> support for it in exactly the same amount you paid for it. Which is to say
> "nothing".
>
> It's not a question of "should", it's only a question of "Dale would prefer it
> if"
>
>    

So, you think most of the KDE users were happy to see support for KDE3 
being dropped, especially considering KDE4 was much less than stable?  
For me and a lot of others, it was worthless at first.  It was good eye 
candy but not functional even for the little I do.

Yea, it is what I want but it is also what MANY others wanted.  Some of 
those people switched to something else or still use KDE3.  It's their 
code, but if people stop using it, what is it really worth?  I'm sure 
KDE wants to gain users not piss them off and make them go away.

For me, if KDE does such a lousy switch over again, I'll be using 
something else.  Given the posts I read where others have already done 
so, I doubt I would be alone.  I'm all for second chances.  We all learn 
the hard way sometimes.  I'm just hoping KDE did.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 808 bytes --]

On Thu, 12 May 2011 07:54:13 -0500, Dale wrote:

> I just hope they also learned from their mistakes.  Dropping KDE3 
> support long before KDE4 was ready was a big one.  That shouldn't be 
> repeated.

If it's as good as everyone says, what more support did it need? Did the
KDE guys come knocking on your door to remove it, or do it remotely
(Android anyone?), or did it just keep working?

I'd say that you got excellent value for money, and a lot more support
for an EOL product than you paid for. Yes, it would have been nice if they
had waited until KDE4 was a little more polished before EOLing KDE3, but
who would have paid for two dev teams?


-- 
Neil Bothwick

I thought I saw the light at the end of the tunnel...
but it was just some sod with a torch bringing me more work!

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 544 bytes --]

On Thu, 12 May 2011 08:46:32 -0500, Dale wrote:

> So, you think most of the KDE users were happy to see support for KDE3 
> being dropped, especially considering KDE4 was much less than stable?  
> For me and a lot of others, it was worthless at first.  It was good eye 
> candy but not functional even for the little I do.

I didn't switch until 4.3 or 4.4, KDE 3.5 worked fine for me up until
then. It probably still works just as well now as part of the Trinity
project.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

It's not a bug, it's tradition!

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Dale]

Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Thu, 12 May 2011 08:46:32 -0500, Dale wrote:
>
>    
>> So, you think most of the KDE users were happy to see support for KDE3
>> being dropped, especially considering KDE4 was much less than stable?
>> For me and a lot of others, it was worthless at first.  It was good eye
>> candy but not functional even for the little I do.
>>      
> I didn't switch until 4.3 or 4.4, KDE 3.5 worked fine for me up until
> then. It probably still works just as well now as part of the Trinity
> project.
>
>    

Which supports my point.  Maintain KDE3 until KDE4 is stable and 
usable.  If it is still working, which I think it is tho some fixes have 
had to be made, then why couldn't KDE support KDE3 just a little while 
longer.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Mike Edenfield]

On 5/12/2011 9:25 AM, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> Apparently, though unproven, at 14:54 on Thursday 12 May 2011, Dale did opine 
> thusly:
> 
>> Neil Bothwick wrote:
>>> The pattern I see is that of selecting only changes that failed and
>>> implying they are the norm.
>>>
>>> Why not add other improvements that were so bad, like the switch from
>>> floppy disks to hard disks, or CDs to DVDs? Companies try to predict
>>> where the market should go so they can lead. No one gets it right all
>>> the time, the ones that survive are those that get it right often enough.
>>> The ones that are most likely to fail are those that never try to
>>> innovate in case someone doesn't like it.
>>>
>>> The important point is that KDE wanted something better, it's unfortunate
>>> that it took so much longer than planned, but it would have taken even
>>> longer if they had not tried.
>>
>> I just hope they also learned from their mistakes.  Dropping KDE3
>> support long before KDE4 was ready was a big one.  That shouldn't be
>> repeated.
> 
> They can do any damn thing they want to with their code. They also you owe 
> support for it in exactly the same amount you paid for it. Which is to say 
> "nothing".
> 
> It's not a question of "should", it's only a question of "Dale would prefer it 
> if"

<parent>
Just because you can do something doesn't mean you should.
</parent>

Of course the KDE3 team had every right to drop KDE3 support whenever
they pleased. And we as free consumers had no real recourse other than
to stop using KDE and/or deal with it.

But it was still a bad decision from a software development standpoint,
and one that ideally should not be made again.

Perhaps it would be more accurate to say "If the KDE4 team expects users
to continue to use the software they spend so much of their time making,
they shouldn't make that kind of decision again."

--Mike

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Peter Humphrey]

On Thursday 12 May 2011 10:23:42 Dale wrote:

> If ntp gives you grief, try chrony.  I use ntp on one machine where ntp
> works well and chrony on my main rig since ntp sucks on it.  Weird but
> it works.

I've been using chrony for years. It's a nice piece of code: it keeps the clock 
in sync, regardless of what other OSes you may run on the same box, and it makes 
gradual adjustments so as not to upset, e.g., postfix.

-- 
Rgds
Peter

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Peter Humphrey]

On Thursday 12 May 2011 14:00:16 Dale wrote:

> Hindsight.  20/20 as always.  LOL  I just wish my eyes was.

What? In the back of your head?  :)

-- 
Rgds
Peter

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Indi]

On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 10:00:02PM +0200, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> On Thursday 12 May 2011 14:00:16 Dale wrote:
> 
> > Hindsight.  20/20 as always.  LOL  I just wish my eyes was.
> 
> What? In the back of your head?  :)
> 

My hair hides the eyes in the back of my head (and hides my 
horns, too).

-- 
caveat utilitor 
♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ ❤ ♫ 

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Dale]

Peter Humphrey wrote:
> On Thursday 12 May 2011 14:00:16 Dale wrote:
>
>    
>> Hindsight.  20/20 as always.  LOL  I just wish my eyes was.
>>      
> What? In the back of your head?  :)
>
>    

You know, you do something then look back and wish you had done it 
differently.  Then again, I have arthritis in my neck and can't turn my 
head much.  That kind of hind sight might be good to.  That would come 
in handy when I am on the tractor.  lol

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Alan McKinnon]

Apparently, though unproven, at 16:38 on Thursday 12 May 2011, Dale did opine 
thusly:

> Neil Bothwick wrote:
> > On Thu, 12 May 2011 08:46:32 -0500, Dale wrote:
> >> So, you think most of the KDE users were happy to see support for KDE3
> >> being dropped, especially considering KDE4 was much less than stable?
> >> For me and a lot of others, it was worthless at first.  It was good eye
> >> candy but not functional even for the little I do.
> > 
> > I didn't switch until 4.3 or 4.4, KDE 3.5 worked fine for me up until
> > then. It probably still works just as well now as part of the Trinity
> > project.
> 
> Which supports my point.  Maintain KDE3 until KDE4 is stable and
> usable.  If it is still working, which I think it is tho some fixes have
> had to be made, then why couldn't KDE support KDE3 just a little while
> longer.


So here's two killer questions for you:

1. How much money did you pay towards KDE dev salaries overall?
2. How many times does your name appear in KDE Changelogs?

While the answer to both is "zero" you do not get to complain.

Here's another killer:

Q. What's the difference between KDE devs and Dale?
A: KDE devs launched an editor and typed code.


-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Dale]

Alan McKinnon wrote:
> Apparently, though unproven, at 16:38 on Thursday 12 May 2011, Dale did opine
> thusly:
>
>    
>> Neil Bothwick wrote:
>>      
>>> On Thu, 12 May 2011 08:46:32 -0500, Dale wrote:
>>>        
>>>> So, you think most of the KDE users were happy to see support for KDE3
>>>> being dropped, especially considering KDE4 was much less than stable?
>>>> For me and a lot of others, it was worthless at first.  It was good eye
>>>> candy but not functional even for the little I do.
>>>>          
>>> I didn't switch until 4.3 or 4.4, KDE 3.5 worked fine for me up until
>>> then. It probably still works just as well now as part of the Trinity
>>> project.
>>>        
>> Which supports my point.  Maintain KDE3 until KDE4 is stable and
>> usable.  If it is still working, which I think it is tho some fixes have
>> had to be made, then why couldn't KDE support KDE3 just a little while
>> longer.
>>      
>
> So here's two killer questions for you:
>
> 1. How much money did you pay towards KDE dev salaries overall?
> 2. How many times does your name appear in KDE Changelogs?
>
> While the answer to both is "zero" you do not get to complain.
>
> Here's another killer:
>
> Q. What's the difference between KDE devs and Dale?
> A: KDE devs launched an editor and typed code.
>
>    

Your questions don't disprove what me and others have posted.  As I have 
said on the KDE mailing list, KDE made a serious mistake dropping KDE3 
before KDE4 was ready.  I didn't make that decision so it is not my 
mistake regardless of what is paid or not paid or what effort I have or 
have not put into it.  There is a LOT of things that are beyond my 
control but it doesn't mean I don't have the right to point out a 
mistake.  I point it out so that hopefully it won't be made again.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Manuel McLure]

Just ran into a gotcha with my main server upgrade to
openrc/baselayout2 - it appears that the old ifconfig network syntax
no longer works. I kept getting the message:

Error: either "local" is duplicate, or "netmask" is garbage

until I changed the syntax from

config_eth0="XX.YY.ZZ.WW broadcast XX.YY.ZZ.255 netmask 255.255.255.0"

to

config_eth0="XX.YY.ZZ.WW/24"

The other syntax worked in baselayout1.
-- 
Manuel A. McLure WW1FA <manuel@mclure.org> <http://www.mclure.org>
...for in Ulthar, according to an ancient and significant law,
no man may kill a cat.                       -- H.P. Lovecraft

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[pk]

On 2011-05-12 23:44, Dale wrote:

> Your questions don't disprove what me and others have posted.  As I have

I think Alans point is that while the KDE developers (volunteers, or
paid for) have certain goals which may or may not be tangential to yours
(clearly, in the case of KDE3 vs KDE4 they are not). So unless you pay
someone to have your specific requirements satisfied you don't get to
complain.
 The volunteers have an "itch to scratch", i.e. they want some certain
functionality which they care about and are, probably, not interested in
anything else. Paid for developers are (probably/most likely) being told
what to work on. And developer resources are, probably, scarce so... If
you (and others) wish KDE3 to be supported then you either need to: 1.
Support/maintain KDE3 yourselves. 2. Pay someone to support/maintain
KDE3. That's the way it works, which is also somewhat valid for
commercial software, but you usually don't get the option of paying the
producer to maintain your specific version unless you are a _big_
customer (with lots of money), but with open source you at least have
the option of "scratching an itch" yourself or paying someone to do the
work for you (and even pool resources with people who share the same
interests).

> mistake.  I point it out so that hopefully it won't be made again.

Of course, anyone can have an opinion! :-D

Best regards

Peter K

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 897 bytes --]

On Thu, 12 May 2011 09:38:15 -0500, Dale wrote:

> Which supports my point.  Maintain KDE3 until KDE4 is stable and 
> usable.  If it is still working, which I think it is tho some fixes
> have had to be made, then why couldn't KDE support KDE3 just a little
> while longer.

Because it would be more than a little while longer. Every day spent
maintaining KDE3 is a day lost to KDE4, the priority was to get KDE4
stable and usable, KDE3 was fine as it was.

The other answers is "they didn't want to". KDE developers are either
volunteers, doing what they want because they can, and what they want is
working on neat stuff for the next release, not old code that is close to
EOL. Or they are employed by the likes of distro makers, who also want
the latest stuff for their products.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

WinErr 003: Dynamic linking error - Your mistake is now in every file

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 518 bytes --]

On Thu, 12 May 2011 16:44:21 -0500, Dale wrote:

> Your questions don't disprove what me and others have posted.  As I
> have said on the KDE mailing list, KDE made a serious mistake dropping
> KDE3 before KDE4 was ready.

How exactly did they "drop" it? It's still available from
ftp://ftp.kde.org/pub/kde/stable/3.5.10 even now and some distros still
have packages for it. It never went away, you can still use it if you
wish.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Wow! That lightning sounds clo..zzzzit!" NO CARRIER

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[BRM]

----- Original Message ----

> From: Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk>
> On Thu, 12 May 2011 16:44:21 -0500, Dale wrote:
> > Your questions don't  disprove what me and others have posted.  As I
> > have said on the KDE  mailing list, KDE made a serious mistake dropping
> > KDE3 before KDE4 was  ready.
> How exactly did they "drop" it? It's still available from
> ftp://ftp.kde.org/pub/kde/stable/3.5.10 even now and some  distros still
> have packages for it. It never went away, you can still use it  if you
> wish.
> 

Ok, so personally I very much like KDE4 - been using it since 4.3 was stabilized 
on Gentoo and love it.
That said...

KDE did seem to drop the ball a bit with their management of the transition from 
KDE3 to KDE4.

To start with, look at the reason why Gentoo dropped KDE3 from Portage - KDE 
stopped maintaining it and the builds started breaking as underlying library 
dependencies changed.
So, sure you may be able to pull a binary build from KDE and use it; or (more 
likely) you'll spend hours and hours getting everything setup right - with all 
the correct versions of the dependencies, etc - to get it up and running.

In other words, when KDE decided to move on to KDE4 full time they left the 
release as it was and it has since gotten harder to use by those that want to 
use it.
Okay - that's not entirely KDE's problem; though it would have helped a long way 
with the KDE4 transition if they kept a few people working on those issues.

The big issue is that in moving to sole development of KDE4, distros started to 
drop KDE3 and replace it with KDE4. For example, Kubuntu 8.04 TLS dropped KDE3 
and used KDE4 long before KDE4 was really user worthy - long before KDE was 
calling it user worthy. But KDEs actions of moving sole development to KDE4 
prompted most distributions to do likewise. As a result, KDE got a lot of flack 
for KDE4 not being ready for users b/c it wasn't - which KDE readily recognized 
and admitted.

Had they kept a small team working on at least the build issues until KDE4 
reached 4.3 then the transition would have likely gone a lot smoother. The 
userbase for KDE4 would have been smaller, so it may have taken a little longer 
to get some of the user feedback; but it would have greatly helped with aiding 
distributions and users making the transition instead of feeling like they were 
dumped from KDE 3.5.10 into KDE 4.0.1.

> 
> So install a distro that still supports KDE3 if that's what you  want or
> need. KDE 3.5.10 is still there, it hasn't been withdrawn from  the
> shelves. You're hardly likely to use Gentoo for such users, so lack  of
> core support for 3.5 in Gentoo is not an issue either.
> 

While I am not personally interested in it, please name one.

Gentoo doesn't support KDE3 any more. You have to go to Trinity to get the 
newer, forked KDE3 series. Last I heard they were equivalent to a 3.5.12 or so; 
but I haven't seen anything on the Desktop list for a while about Trinity.

Needless to say, you may be very hard pressed to find a modern, up-to-date 
distribution that offers KDE3 support.

Ben

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Peter Humphrey]

On Friday 13 May 2011 03:30:27 Manuel McLure wrote:
> Just ran into a gotcha with my main server upgrade to
> openrc/baselayout2 - it appears that the old ifconfig network syntax
> no longer works. I kept getting the message:
> 
> Error: either "local" is duplicate, or "netmask" is garbage
> 
> until I changed the syntax from
> 
> config_eth0="XX.YY.ZZ.WW broadcast XX.YY.ZZ.255 netmask 255.255.255.0"
> 
> to
> 
> config_eth0="XX.YY.ZZ.WW/24"
> 
> The other syntax worked in baselayout1.

It still works here with baselayout 2.0.2:

config_eth0="192.168.2.6 netmask 255.255.255.0 brd 192.168.2.255"
routes_eth0="default via 192.168.2.1"
dns_servers_eth0="192.168.2.2"

No network error messages. Sounds like your error is elsewhere.

-- 
Rgds
Peter

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[William Hubbs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1119 bytes --]

On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 04:21:41PM +0100, Peter Humphrey wrote:
> On Friday 13 May 2011 03:30:27 Manuel McLure wrote:
> > Just ran into a gotcha with my main server upgrade to
> > openrc/baselayout2 - it appears that the old ifconfig network syntax
> > no longer works. I kept getting the message:
> > 
> > Error: either "local" is duplicate, or "netmask" is garbage
> > 
> > until I changed the syntax from
> > 
> > config_eth0="XX.YY.ZZ.WW broadcast XX.YY.ZZ.255 netmask 255.255.255.0"
> > 
> > to
> > 
> > config_eth0="XX.YY.ZZ.WW/24"
> > 
> > The other syntax worked in baselayout1.

That error message comes from iproute2, so it looks like you hit this
bug:

http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=366905

In a nutshell we are trying to convert ifconfig syntax to iproute2
syntax, but we do not do it correctly in this case.

The consensus on the dev list seems to be that it is fine to stop doing
that, so at some point in the future, probably a release coming up soon,
the syntax of config_* lines will have to match the tool you are using
to configure the interfaces.

William


[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Daniel da Veiga]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 722 bytes --]

On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 18:55, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi folks,
>
> I was curious, what's the results of the openrc update for people that have
> done theirs?  Is it pretty simple and "just works" or are there issues?  I'm
> mostly interested in x86 and amd64 since that is what I have.  Just a simple
> works here and I'm X86 or amd64 would be nice.  List issues if you had any.
>

For me it was a breeze.

I have two machines running testing for some time and a server that was an
year behind in updates. I decided to update it now. The easy part was the
OpenRC migration. The hard was mysql (was still 4.1), php, apache (gave up
and installed lighttpd instead) and (oh yeah) kernel.

-- 
Daniel da Veiga

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1005 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Manuel McLure]

On Fri, May 13, 2011 at 9:31 AM, William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org> wrote:
> That error message comes from iproute2, so it looks like you hit this
> bug:
>
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=366905
>
> In a nutshell we are trying to convert ifconfig syntax to iproute2
> syntax, but we do not do it correctly in this case.
>
> The consensus on the dev list seems to be that it is fine to stop doing
> that, so at some point in the future, probably a release coming up soon,
> the syntax of config_* lines will have to match the tool you are using
> to configure the interfaces.

That looks like it. I fixed it by going to /NN notation, but it should
probably be documented in the conversion guide. I was lucky that I
didn't decide to do the upgrade remotely and had a console to work
with because neither network interface came up due to that error.
-- 
Manuel A. McLure WW1FA <manuel@mclure.org> <http://www.mclure.org>
...for in Ulthar, according to an ancient and significant law,
no man may kill a cat.                       -- H.P. Lovecraft

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Walter Dnes]

On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 12:56:27PM +0100, Neil Bothwick wrote
> On Wed, 11 May 2011 20:40:02 -0400, Walter Dnes wrote:
> 
> > > KDE devs decided to take the risk and make the jump ahead of the
> > > curve.  
> > 
> >   Coca Cola went from Coke Classic to New Coke; at least they had the
> > guts to admit that it was a bad idea, and reverse it.
> > 
> >   IBM walked away from their market leading AT.  Rather than put a 386
> > cpu on the motherboard, they went with the PS/2 design, which bombed.
> > 
> >   Micropro *OWNED* word-processing with a DOS-port of their cpm-based
> > Wordstar product.  People were begging and pleading with them to patch
> > it to recognize subdirectories.  Instead, Micropro dropped Wordstar, and
> > came up with a "user friendly" menu-driven abortion called Wordstar
> > 2000.  That was the end.
> > 
> >   Do you see a pattern here?

> The pattern I see is that of selecting only changes that failed and
> implying they are the norm.
> 
> Why not add other improvements that were so bad, like the switch from
> floppy disks to hard disks, or CDs to DVDs? Companies try to predict
> where the market should go so they can lead. No one gets it right all
> the time, the ones that survive are those that get it right often enough.
> The ones that are most likely to fail are those that never try to
> innovate in case someone doesn't like it.

  Floppy disks were being sold long after hard disks were invented.
Ditto for CDs after DVDs came out.  If Coca Cola had brought out "New
Coke" *IN ADDITION TO" "Coke Classic", it wouldn't have been a problem.
"New Coke" would've died more quickly, and Coca Cola wouldn't have seen
so much backlash.  Corporations (IBM's biggest customers) were begging
and pleading for ATs with a 386 CPU, not proprietary PS/2s.  IBM ceased
to manufacture ATs, and said PS/2s or nothing.  IBM is no longer a force
in the corporate desktop market.  If Micropro had added directory
support to Wordstar 3.3, it would've been around a lot longer, and
Wordstar 2000 wouldn't have been the death blow it was.

  Hard drives and DVDs competed against their predecessors and won.
They were obviously superior.  But if your new and allegedly "improved"
product can't stand on its own 2 feet and compete against older
generation products, and you have to shut down or drop support for the
older products for the new one to survive, then it's obvious that the
"new and improved" product is a piece of crap.

-- 
Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org>

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[BRM]

>
>From: Daniel da Veiga <danieldaveiga@gmail.com>
>On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 18:55, Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com> wrote:
>>I was curious, what's the results of the openrc update for people that have done 
>>
>>theirs?  Is it pretty simple and "just works" or are there issues?  I'm mostly 

>>interested in x86 and amd64 since that is what I have.  Just a simple works here 
>>
>>and I'm X86 or amd64 would be nice.  List issues if you had any.
>For me it was a breeze.
>I have two machines running testing for some time and a server that was an year 

>behind in updates. I decided to update it now. The easy part was the OpenRC 
>migration. The hard was mysql (was still 4.1), php, apache (gave up and 
>installed lighttpd instead) and (oh yeah) kernel.
>

I just finished update my server. OpenRC updated without any problems.
My laptop had to have its compiler updated before I could could do the sync and 
update - guess I didn't finish the previous update and KDE wanted GCC 4.4 
instead of 4.3.
I should be able to get it going tonight hopefully...

My desktop is a few months behind - still gotta get it fixed from a previous 
failed update.
But won't have the time for at least another month. I may end up just rebuilding 
it if the updates are too troublesome - it may prove faster.

Ben

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Mick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: Text/Plain, Size: 3558 bytes --]

On Friday 13 May 2011 18:57:47 Walter Dnes wrote:
> On Thu, May 12, 2011 at 12:56:27PM +0100, Neil Bothwick wrote
> 
> > On Wed, 11 May 2011 20:40:02 -0400, Walter Dnes wrote:
> > > > KDE devs decided to take the risk and make the jump ahead of the
> > > > curve.
> > > > 
> > >   Coca Cola went from Coke Classic to New Coke; at least they had the
> > > 
> > > guts to admit that it was a bad idea, and reverse it.
> > > 
> > >   IBM walked away from their market leading AT.  Rather than put a 386
> > > 
> > > cpu on the motherboard, they went with the PS/2 design, which bombed.
> > > 
> > >   Micropro *OWNED* word-processing with a DOS-port of their cpm-based
> > > 
> > > Wordstar product.  People were begging and pleading with them to patch
> > > it to recognize subdirectories.  Instead, Micropro dropped Wordstar,
> > > and came up with a "user friendly" menu-driven abortion called
> > > Wordstar 2000.  That was the end.
> > > 
> > >   Do you see a pattern here?
> > 
> > The pattern I see is that of selecting only changes that failed and
> > implying they are the norm.
> > 
> > Why not add other improvements that were so bad, like the switch from
> > floppy disks to hard disks, or CDs to DVDs? Companies try to predict
> > where the market should go so they can lead. No one gets it right all
> > the time, the ones that survive are those that get it right often enough.
> > The ones that are most likely to fail are those that never try to
> > innovate in case someone doesn't like it.
> 
>   Floppy disks were being sold long after hard disks were invented.
> Ditto for CDs after DVDs came out.  If Coca Cola had brought out "New
> Coke" *IN ADDITION TO" "Coke Classic", it wouldn't have been a problem.
> "New Coke" would've died more quickly, and Coca Cola wouldn't have seen
> so much backlash.  Corporations (IBM's biggest customers) were begging
> and pleading for ATs with a 386 CPU, not proprietary PS/2s.  IBM ceased
> to manufacture ATs, and said PS/2s or nothing.  IBM is no longer a force
> in the corporate desktop market.  If Micropro had added directory
> support to Wordstar 3.3, it would've been around a lot longer, and
> Wordstar 2000 wouldn't have been the death blow it was.
> 
>   Hard drives and DVDs competed against their predecessors and won.
> They were obviously superior.  But if your new and allegedly "improved"
> product can't stand on its own 2 feet and compete against older
> generation products, and you have to shut down or drop support for the
> older products for the new one to survive, then it's obvious that the
> "new and improved" product is a piece of crap.

You are confusing matters.

The launch of "new & improved" product is often a matter of designed 
obsolescence of the old product for the purpose of generating additional 
sales.  In a (pseudo)competitive capitalistic model this is what most consumer 
goods have been doing, canibalising their own previous generation of products.

In a FOSS model this argument does not stand or make much sense.  I think that 
the KDE devs made a strategic design decision and took KDE4 in a different 
direction than KDE3.  Some of us we happier with the KDE3 ... a selection of 
apps, rather that a heavy duty integrated DE with semantic searches and what 
not.

What is common between your examples and KDE is (perhaps?) the lack of 
adequate market research and testing.

What-ever, life moves on of course and the wrinkles on KDE4 are being ironed 
out.
-- 
Regards,
Mick

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part. --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Dale]

BRM wrote:
>
> My desktop is a few months behind - still gotta get it fixed from a previous
> failed update.
> But won't have the time for at least another month. I may end up just rebuilding
> it if the updates are too troublesome - it may prove faster.
>
> Ben
>
>    

I just went through the same thing with my old x86 rig.  I would 
recommend syncing then doing a emerge -e world and being done with it.  
Actually, I would use the nifty gcc upgrade script.  It's on the forums 
or I can send it to you.  It's old but it still works and is faster than 
emerge -e system a couple times then a emerge -e world.

I had python plus a few other issues.  It was a mess until I did the 
whole thing.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Sebastian Beßler]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 401 bytes --]

Am 13.05.2011 21:50, schrieb Mick:
> a selection of 
> apps, rather that a heavy duty integrated DE with semantic searches and what 
> not.

I have written my thesis about semantic searches but I am absolut unable
to use that feature in KDE.

But that and the graphic distortions I have aside is KDE4 now useable.
It is time for KDE5 to annoy the users again :-P

Greetings

Sebastian


[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 900 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 616 bytes --]

On Fri, 13 May 2011 13:57:47 -0400, Walter Dnes wrote:

> But if your new and allegedly "improved"
> product can't stand on its own 2 feet and compete against older
> generation products, and you have to shut down or drop support for the
> older products for the new one to survive, then it's obvious that the
> "new and improved" product is a piece of crap.

Can you provide documentation showing this was the reason work on KDE3
stopped? Or is this more FUD?

Hint: You cannot "shut down" an open source project.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Things are more like they are now than they ever were before.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2625 bytes --]

On Fri, 13 May 2011 07:19:35 -0700 (PDT), BRM wrote:

> KDE did seem to drop the ball a bit with their management of the
> transition from KDE3 to KDE4.

There's no doubt it could have been a lot better. The problem was that it
was based on their prediction that 4.0 would be a dev release while 4.1
would be usable, it wasn't.

> Okay - that's not entirely KDE's problem; though it would have helped a
> long way with the KDE4 transition if they kept a few people working on
> those issues.

How would you feel if you were a KDE dev told "we're all going to play
with the cool new toys now, but we want you to stay here and look
after the boring musty old stuff."? It would be bad enough if you were
being paid for it.

> The big issue is that in moving to sole development of KDE4, distros
> started to drop KDE3 and replace it with KDE4. For example, Kubuntu
> 8.04 TLS dropped KDE3 and used KDE4 long before KDE4 was really user
> worthy - long before KDE was calling it user worthy.

I think that says more about Ubuntu than KDE, after all ,they'd done a
similar thing with GNOME/Unity now.

> But KDEs actions
> of moving sole development to KDE4 prompted most distributions to do
> likewise.

Many distros, especially the enterprise focussed ones like SUSE, kept 3.5
around for quite a while.

> Had they kept a small team working on at least the build issues until
> KDE4 reached 4.3 then the transition would have likely gone a lot
> smoother.

True, but no one expected it to take that long to get ready, and
diverting resources to look after 3.5 would have meant it taking even
longer.

> > So install a distro that still supports KDE3 if that's what you  want
> > or need. KDE 3.5.10 is still there, it hasn't been withdrawn from  the
> > shelves. You're hardly likely to use Gentoo for such users, so lack
> > of core support for 3.5 in Gentoo is not an issue either.
> > 
> 
> While I am not personally interested in it, please name one.
> 
> Gentoo doesn't support KDE3 any more. You have to go to Trinity to get
> the newer, forked KDE3 series. Last I heard they were equivalent to a
> 3.5.12 or so; but I haven't seen anything on the Desktop list for a
> while about Trinity.
> 
> Needless to say, you may be very hard pressed to find a modern,
> up-to-date distribution that offers KDE3 support.

If it defaulted to KDE 3.5, it would be neither modern nor up to date.
But at the time of the transition, when KDE4 was still too flakey for
many, there were several - openSUSE for one.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Can vegetarians eat animal crackers?

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[Tanstaafl]

On 2011-05-13 4:16 AM, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> KDE3 was fine as it was.

I think that pretty much sums it up...

No one forced anyone to upgrade to 4.0 when it was released. Anyone
(you) could have continued using 3.x until *you* were satisfied with 4.x...

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: How's the openrc update going for everyone?

[BRM]

----- Original Message ----

> From: Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk>
> > Okay - that's not entirely KDE's  problem; though it would have helped a
> > long way with the KDE4 transition  if they kept a few people working on
> > those issues.
> 
> How would you  feel if you were a KDE dev told "we're all going to play
> with the cool new  toys now, but we want you to stay here and look
> after the boring musty old  stuff."? It would be bad enough if you were
> being paid for it.

Many software developers are exactly in that position. So what? it's what you do 
when you want to maintain something.
That's the also very much the case with numerous kernel developers - they work 
to keep older versions going as Linus and team move to the next version.
So yes, there are even volunteers that will do it.
 
> >  The big issue is that in moving to sole development of KDE4, distros
> >  started to drop KDE3 and replace it with KDE4. For example, Kubuntu
> > 8.04  TLS dropped KDE3 and used KDE4 long before KDE4 was really user
> > worthy -  long before KDE was calling it user worthy.
> 
> I think that says more about  Ubuntu than KDE, after all ,they'd done a
> similar thing with GNOME/Unity  now.

There were other distros too. Gentoo dropped KDE3 around 4.3.
 
> > But KDEs actions
> > of moving sole development to KDE4  prompted most distributions to do
> > likewise.
> 
> Many distros,  especially the enterprise focussed ones like SUSE, kept 3.5
> around for quite  a while.
> 
> > Had they kept a small team working on at least the build  issues until
> > KDE4 reached 4.3 then the transition would have likely gone  a lot
> > smoother.
> 
> True, but no one expected it to take that long to  get ready, and
> diverting resources to look after 3.5 would have meant it  taking even
> longer.
> 
> > > So install a distro that still supports  KDE3 if that's what you  want
> > > or need. KDE 3.5.10 is still  there, it hasn't been withdrawn from  the
> > > shelves. You're  hardly likely to use Gentoo for such users, so lack
> > > of core support  for 3.5 in Gentoo is not an issue either.
> > > 
> > 
> > While I  am not personally interested in it, please name one.
> > 
> > Gentoo  doesn't support KDE3 any more. You have to go to Trinity to get
> > the  newer, forked KDE3 series. Last I heard they were equivalent to a
> > 3.5.12  or so; but I haven't seen anything on the Desktop list for a
> > while about  Trinity.
> > 
> > Needless to say, you may be very hard pressed to find  a modern,
> > up-to-date distribution that offers KDE3 support.
> 
> If it  defaulted to KDE 3.5, it would be neither modern nor up to date.
> But at the  time of the transition, when KDE4 was still too flakey for
> many, there were  several - openSUSE for one.

Difference between "modern, up-to-date and functional" versus "modern, 
up-to-date, and bleeding-edge".
If you are aiming for bleeding-edge, then yes, moving to KDE4 at 4.0 would have 
been fine.
But most don't use or want to use bleeding edge - they want functional. In both 
cases they still want modern and up-to-date.

Ben