[gentoo-user] OpenRc-0.12 is coming soon

[gentoo-user] OpenRc-0.12 is coming soon

[William Hubbs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 843 bytes --]

All,

This message is an announcement and a reminder.

OpenRc-0.12 will be introduced to the portage tree in the next few days.

If you are using ~arch OpenRc, the standard disclaimer applies: remember
that you might be subject to breakage.

I do not know of any breakage personally. It does work on my system, and
I know of others who are using OpenRc from git successfully. Some are
OpenRc team members, and at least one is a Gentoo user.

If you are not comfortable with the possibility of breakage, I recommend
that you make sure you do not upgrade right away.

If, on the other hand, you are comfortable with that possibility and you
are willing to help us test and get rid of bugs before we go stable,
feel free to run ~arch.

In other words, this is the standard Gentoo disclaimer, so consider
yourself warned.

Thanks much,


William


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

Re: [gentoo-user] OpenRc-0.12 is coming soon

[Keith Dart]

Re , William Hubbs said:
> All,
> 
> This message is an announcement and a reminder.
> 
> OpenRc-0.12 will be introduced to the portage tree in the next few
> days.
> 
> If you are using ~arch OpenRc, the standard disclaimer applies:
> remember that you might be subject to breakage.

I just got around to upgrading to it. When I did my /etc/conf.d/net
file disappeared, and my network interface would not come up. There is
not even a sample net file any more.  I had to manually add it back,
using a syntax I found on the wiki site. 




-- Keith


-- 

-- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
   Keith Dart <keith@dartworks.biz>
   public key: ID: 19017044
   <http://www.dartworks.biz/>
   =====================================================================

Re: [gentoo-user] OpenRc-0.12 is coming soon

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 695 bytes --]

On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 08:43:36 -0700, Keith Dart wrote:

> I just got around to upgrading to it. When I did my /etc/conf.d/net
> file disappeared, and my network interface would not come up. There is
> not even a sample net file any more.  I had to manually add it back,
> using a syntax I found on the wiki site. 

I lost conf.d/net too, but there is still a sample file, but it is owned
by netifrc, which is now a dependency of openrc.

Note to those using USE="-* I_WANT_TO_BREAK_MY_SYSTEM", you will break it
when installing the new openrc because you won't get this package.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Q: What's the proper plural of a 'Net-connected Windows machine?
A: A Botnet

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

Re: [gentoo-user] OpenRc-0.12 is coming soon

[Stefan G. Weichinger]

Am 14.08.2013 18:24, schrieb Neil Bothwick:

> I lost conf.d/net too, but there is still a sample file, but it is
> owned by netifrc, which is now a dependency of openrc.
> 
> Note to those using USE="-* I_WANT_TO_BREAK_MY_SYSTEM", you will
> break it when installing the new openrc because you won't get this
> package.

For the records:

this upgrade didn't hurt on my systemd-based installations.

And it is always nice to have /etc inside a git-repo or similar (aside
from backups).

Stefan

Re: [gentoo-user] OpenRc-0.12 is coming soon

[Todd Goodman]

* Stefan G. Weichinger <lists@xunil.at> [130814 13:25]:
> Am 14.08.2013 18:24, schrieb Neil Bothwick:
> 
> > I lost conf.d/net too, but there is still a sample file, but it is
> > owned by netifrc, which is now a dependency of openrc.
> > 
> > Note to those using USE="-* I_WANT_TO_BREAK_MY_SYSTEM", you will
> > break it when installing the new openrc because you won't get this
> > package.
> 
> For the records:
> 
> this upgrade didn't hurt on my systemd-based installations.
> 
> And it is always nice to have /etc inside a git-repo or similar (aside
> from backups).
> 
> Stefan

Also for the record, I still have my conf.d/net after upgrading on three
~x86 machines.

Todd

[gentoo-user] Re: OpenRc-0.12 is coming soon

[»Q«]

On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 17:24:01 +0100
Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:

> On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 08:43:36 -0700, Keith Dart wrote:
> 
> > I just got around to upgrading to it. When I did my /etc/conf.d/net
> > file disappeared, and my network interface would not come up. There
> > is not even a sample net file any more.  I had to manually add it
> > back, using a syntax I found on the wiki site. 
> 
> I lost conf.d/net too, but there is still a sample file, but it is
> owned by netifrc, which is now a dependency of openrc.
> 
> Note to those using USE="-* I_WANT_TO_BREAK_MY_SYSTEM", you will
> break it when installing the new openrc because you won't get this
> package.

Thanks for the heads-up.  USE="netifrc".  Is this the thing they were
calling oldnet for a while?

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: OpenRc-0.12 is coming soon

[William Hubbs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1034 bytes --]

On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 02:40:54PM -0500, »Q« wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 17:24:01 +0100
> Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 08:43:36 -0700, Keith Dart wrote:
> > 
> > > I just got around to upgrading to it. When I did my /etc/conf.d/net
> > > file disappeared, and my network interface would not come up. There
> > > is not even a sample net file any more.  I had to manually add it
> > > back, using a syntax I found on the wiki site. 
> > 
> > I lost conf.d/net too, but there is still a sample file, but it is
> > owned by netifrc, which is now a dependency of openrc.
> > 
> > Note to those using USE="-* I_WANT_TO_BREAK_MY_SYSTEM", you will
> > break it when installing the new openrc because you won't get this
> > package.
> 
> Thanks for the heads-up.  USE="netifrc".  Is this the thing they were
> calling oldnet for a while?

Yes, it is. Some folks wanted us to get "old" out of the mane because
they were afraid old meant we were going to kill it off.

William

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

Re: [gentoo-user] OpenRc-0.12 is coming soon

[Walter Dnes]

On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 05:24:01PM +0100, Neil Bothwick wrote
> On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 08:43:36 -0700, Keith Dart wrote:
> 
> > I just got around to upgrading to it. When I did my /etc/conf.d/net
> > file disappeared, and my network interface would not come up. There is
> > not even a sample net file any more.  I had to manually add it back,
> > using a syntax I found on the wiki site. 
> 
> I lost conf.d/net too, but there is still a sample file, but it is owned
> by netifrc, which is now a dependency of openrc.
> 
> Note to those using USE="-* I_WANT_TO_BREAK_MY_SYSTEM", you will break it
> when installing the new openrc because you won't get this package.

  Thanks for the update.  I've updated my /etc/portage/package.use
accordingly.  It hasn't happened to me, so I'm not in a position to file
a bug report, but WTF is the openrc ebuild doing deleting
/etc/conf.d/net ?!?!?  In many cases, removing a package will not remove
its config file.

-- 
Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org>
I don't run "desktop environments"; I run useful applications

Re: [gentoo-user] OpenRc-0.12 is coming soon

[Paul Hartman]

On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 10:54 AM, Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org> wrote:
> WTF is the openrc ebuild doing deleting
> /etc/conf.d/net ?!?!?  In many cases, removing a package will not remove
> its config file.

The ebuild doesn't touch it, as far as I can tell. But you are right,
portage shouldn't remove a file if it has been changed, as far as I
know. /etc/conf.d/net is not owned by any package anymore, so maybe
that plays into it as well.

Re: [gentoo-user] OpenRc-0.12 is coming soon

[William Hubbs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 838 bytes --]

On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 08:43:36AM -0700, Keith Dart wrote:
> Re , William Hubbs said:
> > All,
> > 
> > This message is an announcement and a reminder.
> > 
> > OpenRc-0.12 will be introduced to the portage tree in the next few
> > days.
> > 
> > If you are using ~arch OpenRc, the standard disclaimer applies:
> > remember that you might be subject to breakage.
> 
> I just got around to upgrading to it. When I did my /etc/conf.d/net
> file disappeared, and my network interface would not come up. There is
> not even a sample net file any more.  I had to manually add it back,
> using a syntax I found on the wiki site. 

For the folks who lost /etc/conf.d/net, was it the stub file that came
with OpenRC, or had you modify it?

The sample file is still there, it is just in /usr/share/doc/netifrc*.

William


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

Re: [gentoo-user] OpenRc-0.12 is coming soon

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 517 bytes --]

On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 15:04:38 -0500, William Hubbs wrote:

> For the folks who lost /etc/conf.d/net, was it the stub file that came
> with OpenRC, or had you modify it?

I've tried the update on two systems, both with modified config files
(the second one modified just before the upgrade to see if that made a
difference). The first one lost it's file, the second one kept it.

I've got a couple more t update so I'll see if I can see a pattern.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Too many clicks spoil the browse.

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

Re: [gentoo-user] OpenRc-0.12 is coming soon

[William Hubbs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 894 bytes --]

On Thu, Aug 15, 2013 at 12:12:05AM +0100, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 15:04:38 -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
> 
> > For the folks who lost /etc/conf.d/net, was it the stub file that came
> > with OpenRC, or had you modify it?
> 
> I've tried the update on two systems, both with modified config files
> (the second one modified just before the upgrade to see if that made a
> difference). The first one lost it's file, the second one kept it.

On the first one, you said that you had modified /etc/conf.d/net.
Had you upgraded OpenRC since you modified /etc/conf.d/net on that
system?

If yes, that may be the pattern I need.

The first version of OpenRC on that system was earlier than 0.11.8, and
you modified /etc/conf.d/net before 0.11.8 was on that system, then you
upgraded to 0.11.8 then 0.12 without touching /etc/conf.d/net. Is that right?

William


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

Re: [gentoo-user] OpenRc-0.12 is coming soon

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1068 bytes --]

On Thu, 15 Aug 2013 15:32:16 -0500, William Hubbs wrote:

> > I've tried the update on two systems, both with modified config files
> > (the second one modified just before the upgrade to see if that made a
> > difference). The first one lost it's file, the second one kept it.  
> 
> On the first one, you said that you had modified /etc/conf.d/net.
> Had you upgraded OpenRC since you modified /etc/conf.d/net on that
> system?

The first one had a static address set up in conf.d/net, set up years ago,
and the file disappeared on upgrading to openrc-0.12

> 
> If yes, that may be the pattern I need.
> 
> The first version of OpenRC on that system was earlier than 0.11.8, and
> you modified /etc/conf.d/net before 0.11.8 was on that system, then you
> upgraded to 0.11.8 then 0.12 without touching /etc/conf.d/net. Is that
> right?

Yes, the file was last modified on Dec 6yh 2012, at which time I had
openrc-0.11.7.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

What do you have when you have six lawyers buried up to their necks in
sand? Not enough sand.

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

Re: [gentoo-user] OpenRc-0.12 is coming soon

[Paul Hartman]

On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 6:12 PM, Neil Bothwick <neil@digimed.co.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, 14 Aug 2013 15:04:38 -0500, William Hubbs wrote:
>
>> For the folks who lost /etc/conf.d/net, was it the stub file that came
>> with OpenRC, or had you modify it?
>
> I've tried the update on two systems, both with modified config files
> (the second one modified just before the upgrade to see if that made a
> difference). The first one lost it's file, the second one kept it.
>
> I've got a couple more t update so I'll see if I can see a pattern.

Looks like they've solved the mystery:
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=481336

Sounds like if you modified the file BEFORE installing the previous
version of openrc, it got removed, but if you modified it AFTER
installing your previous openrc it would be kept.

Re: [gentoo-user] OpenRc-0.12 is coming soon

[Keith Dart]

Re
20130814084336.1c295d16@dartworks.biz20130814084336.1c295d16@dartworks.biz20130802203646.GA3926@linux1,
William Hubbs said:
> For the folks who lost /etc/conf.d/net, was it the stub file that came
> with OpenRC, or had you modify it?


For me it was a custom one, with static IP configuration.

I didn't see this "netifrc". Is that documented somewhere?


-- Keith


-- 

-- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
   Keith Dart <keith@dartworks.biz>
   public key: ID: 19017044
   <http://www.dartworks.biz/>
   =====================================================================

Re: [gentoo-user] OpenRc-0.12 is coming soon

[William Hubbs]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1077 bytes --]

On Wed, Aug 14, 2013 at 11:52:29PM -0700, Keith Dart wrote:
> Re
> 20130814084336.1c295d16@dartworks.biz20130814084336.1c295d16@dartworks.biz20130802203646.GA3926@linux1,
> William Hubbs said:
> > For the folks who lost /etc/conf.d/net, was it the stub file that came
> > with OpenRC, or had you modify it?
> 
> 
> For me it was a custom one, with static IP configuration.
> 
> I didn't see this "netifrc". Is that documented somewhere?

netifrc is the net.* script and all  of the modules it uses.

It was separated because it needs to be on its own development cycle,
and it was a large chunk of the code base for OpenRC. Also,
almost 1/3 of the OpenRC bugs are against this script.

The documentation, as it is, is in /usr/share/doc/netifrc*.

William

> 
> 
> -- Keith
> 
> 
> -- 
> 
> -- ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>    Keith Dart <keith@dartworks.biz>
>    public key: ID: 19017044
>    <http://www.dartworks.biz/>
>    =====================================================================
> 

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

Re: [gentoo-user] OpenRc-0.12 is coming soon

[Markos Chandras]

On 14 August 2013 16:43, Keith Dart <keith@dartworks.biz> wrote:
> Re , William Hubbs said:
>> All,
>>
>> This message is an announcement and a reminder.
>>
>> OpenRc-0.12 will be introduced to the portage tree in the next few
>> days.
>>
>> If you are using ~arch OpenRc, the standard disclaimer applies:
>> remember that you might be subject to breakage.
>
> I just got around to upgrading to it. When I did my /etc/conf.d/net
> file disappeared, and my network interface would not come up. There is
> not even a sample net file any more.  I had to manually add it back,
> using a syntax I found on the wiki site.
>
>

The package is now masked (openrc-0.12) because quite a few people
lost their net configs

So yep, ~arch being *this* broken is not so nice

-- 
Regards,
Markos Chandras - Gentoo Linux Developer
http://dev.gentoo.org/~hwoarang

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-user] OpenRc-0.12 is coming soon

[Todd Goodman]

* Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> [130816 10:43]:
> On Fri, Aug 16, 2013 at 10:09 AM, Markos Chandras <hwoarang@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > The package is now masked (openrc-0.12) because quite a few people
> > lost their net configs
> >
> > So yep, ~arch being *this* broken is not so nice
> 
> And hence the value of having a group of volunteer guinea pigs
> (anybody running ~arch) is demonstrated.  That said, masking big
> changes and calling for volunteers among the volunteers doesn't hurt.
> 
> Seems like we need to be more careful with code that runs outside the
> sandbox.  Config protection is nice, but it is useless when code runs
> outside the sandbox.
> 
> Rich

As one of those volunteer guinea pigs it all worked fine with the four
~x86 and three ~amd64 machines I've upgraded to openrc-0.12:0.

They vary in when they were installed from 2005 up to a couple months
ago and are generally updated daily.

All ~x86 are "servers" (though most have X, KDE, and Gnome installed,
they're only accessed remotely.)

Two of the ~amd64 machines are "desktops" (though they both run services
as "servers.")

If I can help narrow anything down further I'm happy to help.  Or to
test anything.

Todd