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 <gentoo-user+bounces-132459-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>)
id 1Rau4J-0007gA-Q4
for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 19:00:44 +0000
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 4B9D421C1C5;
Wed, 14 Dec 2011 19:00:28 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-yx0-f181.google.com (mail-yx0-f181.google.com [209.85.213.181])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48D3A21C064
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 18:59:35 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by yenm3 with SMTP id m3so1008083yen.40
for <gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 14 Dec 2011 10:59:34 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references
:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
bh=YI1QGkApWKiDAlWh4bji/+RAuwJeLxWztvRep28NTKQ=;
b=PN91B9bZeSBusgqIK5oSKbqPumhlwkqBOKvaKZBTNgyQK9W6dKTCUKNgFlww+udRYH
3jwNBtfC+tqDHmRpSH3STJeOUKar7ih/fVYOE9YkESHebc9OlNvxje9QlPrEvki8WnAG
e8GkzJcfRd6qmdkSXM7KpidYWDREaOeOp/1rs=
Received: by 10.236.128.242 with SMTP id f78mr14239343yhi.7.1323889174761;
Wed, 14 Dec 2011 10:59:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.2.5] (adsl-98-95-108-107.jan.bellsouth.net. [98.95.108.107])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id f7sm2731831and.17.2011.12.14.10.59.32
(version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER);
Wed, 14 Dec 2011 10:59:33 -0800 (PST)
Message-ID: <4EE8F213.9010802@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 14 Dec 2011 12:59:31 -0600
From: Dale <rdalek1967@gmail.com>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:7.0.1) Gecko/20111022 Firefox/7.0.1 SeaMonkey/2.4.1
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-user+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-user+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-user.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] What happened to OpenRC 0.9.6?
References: <jatlds$eo7$1@dough.gmane.org> <4EE488D3.9090600@alyf.net> <CA+hid6G93+F+T3oATiFLPzb64MqVtOtbp3xyS04FFAtR5ELEQg@mail.gmail.com> <4EE8A477.2040409@kutulu.org>
In-Reply-To: <4EE8A477.2040409@kutulu.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Archives-Salt: 43d2d496-86cf-44c2-a13d-3d5b7fdb602a
X-Archives-Hash: 6ac3f8b756c057c9b0e92603e0cdb55f
Mike Edenfield wrote:
> On 12/11/2011 1:10 PM, James Broadhead wrote:
>> On 11 December 2011 10:41, Andrea Conti<alyf@alyf.net> wrote:
>>> On 27/11/11 16.36, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>>>> sys-apps/openrc-0.9.6 is just... gone? Not even masked, but
>>>> completely
>>>> gone from portage.
>>>
>>> FYI, sys-apps/openrc-0.9.7 is out.
>>>
>>> Apparently, the solution to the rc_parallel issues was to remove every
>>> mention of rc_parallel from the default /etc/rc.conf
>>>
>>> Brilliant.
>>
>> I didn't take this email at face value when I read it earlier, but I
>> just merged my openrc-0.9.7 config file.
>> Wow, what a cynical move.
>
> Its only cynical in that it reflects a basic failing of human
> psychology, namely, "thst warning doesn't apply to me" syndrome.
>
> I imagine their thought process went something like this:
>
> "We exposed this experimental feature that's hard to get right and
> only moderately useful, with explicit instructions not to complain if
> it doesn't work unless you are personally going to put in the time and
> effort to fix it."
>
> "People blithely ignored our warning, enabled it, then complained
> loudly when it did not work."
>
> "Since no one bothers to read the warning in rc.conf about this
> feature, and we have neither the time, manpower, nor overwhelming need
> to make it work, we'll just stop mentioning it."
>
> "HOPEFULLY anyone smart enough to find and re-enable a hidden,
> explicitly unsupported feature will be smart enough not to complain
> when it doesn't work."
>
> --Mike
>
>
Sounds like good reasoning too. lol
Dale
:-) :-)
--
I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words!
Miss the compile output? Hint:
EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--quiet-build=n"