From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1RVX8H-0000mq-QF for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 23:30:38 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 0FAC021C14A; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 23:30:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com (ironport2-out.teksavvy.com [206.248.154.181]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6479521C0C0 for ; Tue, 29 Nov 2011 23:29:09 +0000 (UTC) X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av0EAO5p1U5FxL6C/2dsb2JhbABDqn6BBoFyAQEFOhwzCxgcEhQlN79Xg2mEIIIyYwSIJ4RFJwGHP4VViA2ETg X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.69,594,1315195200"; d="scan'208";a="150166064" Received: from 69-196-190-130.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO waltdnes.org) ([69.196.190.130]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with SMTP; 29 Nov 2011 18:29:07 -0500 Received: by waltdnes.org (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Tue, 29 Nov 2011 18:28:48 -0500 From: "Walter Dnes" Date: Tue, 29 Nov 2011 18:28:48 -0500 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What happened to OpenRC 0.9.6? Message-ID: <20111129232848.GD2203@waltdnes.org> References: <4ED28F6A.7090606@alyf.net> <1322483386.66469.4.camel@stretch> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Archives-Salt: 875aba56-1c8f-45ef-a7c0-eefd95e408d7 X-Archives-Hash: 4dd14112c47fff000ee06ebbeefc1a6d On Mon, Nov 28, 2011 at 06:15:14PM +0200, Nikos Chantziaras wrote > On 11/28/2011 02:29 PM, Albert W. Hopkins wrote: > > > Sorry to add more to the whining but... > > > > Yes, you are in the testing tree. Yes, as a member of testing, *you* > > expect things will occasionally break, and it is *your* job to test > > things, break them, and report bugs. > > Generally true, but not when something is obviously broken. That means > not even its upstream dev bothered to test it. There aren't enough developers on the planet to test every possible combination of testing ebuild, and non-recommended rc.conf option. > ~arch is for "we think this works, but please give it a go in case there > are problems". It's *not* for "we have no idea if this works because we > didn't even try it once". waltdnes@d531 ~ $ head /etc/rc.conf # Global OpenRC configuration settings # Set to "YES" if you want the rc system to try and start services # in parallel for a slight speed improvement. When running in parallel we # prefix the service output with its name as the output will get # jumbled up. # 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" The developers tried it, and it worked on *THEIR SYSTEMS*. It appears that even the developers don't dare run rc_parallel on their machines... nuff said. -- Walter Dnes