From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4618A138E20 for ; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 14:32:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DD058E0D09; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 14:32:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from homiemail-a93.g.dreamhost.com (caibbdcaaagg.dreamhost.com [208.113.200.66]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CAF1EE0C7D for ; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 14:32:43 +0000 (UTC) Received: from homiemail-a93.g.dreamhost.com (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by homiemail-a93.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5EF6884075 for ; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 06:32:43 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=libertytrek.org; h= message-id:date:from:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s= libertytrek.org; bh=U/06KQ0Bw+Q8+kD+W68GXWEj+Dk=; b=d/ZnWR3pex9f JHsd7vbIuShebIQI8MWHMzlMmCgvbkmuW/WjWimEYE5ojl/4a7029+mtU6xL0w/V x2nSI8AGN0tfiWycoj+aypHQobC8pDAEdFOy3sNqG3TfAb4riiNjGuycpmEl7ZRh ipXyqvHIST9r9yzx/M8rnh8OUCqME28= Received: from [127.0.0.1] (unknown [159.63.145.2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: tanstaafl@libertytrek.org) by homiemail-a93.g.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 406D28406E for ; Fri, 21 Feb 2014 06:32:43 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <53076367.6040000@libertytrek.org> Date: Fri, 21 Feb 2014 09:32:07 -0500 From: Tanstaafl User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 5.1; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.2.0 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 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Providing a path for systemd on gentoo - 'profiles', or 'eselect module'? - WAS Re: [gentoo-user] Debian just voted in systemd for default init system in jessie References: <52FF84CE.2050301@libertytrek.org> <20140217215255.5766cb026df2f0b8002f8702@gmail.com> <5302c048.462f0e0a.3d3e.5888@mx.google.com> <20140218210633.d25f4bb88b3891f7c0ed11c6@gmail.com> <20140218220712.9ec8d2529ef49d743b3bc826@gmail.com> <5304576E.4000704@sporkbox.us> <5304A5DE.4050905@libertytrek.org> <5305FACC.8080705@libertytrek.org> <530646EA.4020300@libertytrek.org> <5306603C.1040602@libertytrek.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: c90096cf-1a34-4192-ac36-68d0c58434e2 X-Archives-Hash: 513d2e80a2cd0b2d77cb18cdd23c58eb On 2014-02-20 4:04 PM, Canek Pel=C3=A1ez Vald=C3=A9s w= rote: > On Thu, Feb 20, 2014 at 2:06 PM, Tanstaafl wrote: >> Thinking about this more, since apparently using a separate >> profile may just be 'overkill', how about something simpler, like, >> for example, using eselect... >> >> Something like: >> >> # eselect init list >> Available init systems: >> [1] OpenRC * >> [2] systemd >> [3] runit >> >> (whatever choices are supported). > the switching requires reemerging things because you need to set some > USE flags and quit others. That's the "difficult" (which is not, > really) part; if you set the USE flags yourself or via a profile, or > an eselect module, I don't think the difference matters atall. Ok, so, since it really is so simple, wouldn't it be easier to implement=20 this as an eselect module then, as opposed to creating a bunch of=20 separate profiles? (NOTE: to those who might argue it is so trivial that even adding an=20 eselect module is overkill, I would respond: We have eselect modules for changing active profiles and for switching=20 active kernels, and as far as I know, all those do is manage a symlink=20 (/etc/portage/make.profile for the active profile, and /usr/src/linux).) Then, if/when a user attempted to switch, eselect could simply spit out=20 a warning message about what precisely would be required to complete the=20 switch (and this message could be kept updated if/when these=20 requirements change), including scary warnings about breakage if they=20 fail to complete the steps necessary, then prompt them for confirmation=20 (default [n], so an explicit [y] required to execute the change)? I'd also suggest throwing in a test for current running kernel config,=20 to make sure it fully supports booting with systemd, and maybe a new=20 emerge command that can also be maintained to make sure that *all*=20 necessary packages are rebuilt? I know, I know, talk is cheap, but again, if systemd proponents want=20 systemd on gentoo to ever become a reasonably simple option (or even=20 eventually become the new default), I think it is necessary for these=20 tools to be built anyway as part of the vetting process, and ultimately=20 to provide as many (automated) safeguards as possible to keep new and=20 even existing gentoo users from shooting themselves in the foot when=20 installing it. So, the reason I'm explicitly asking is I'd really like for this thread=20 to result in a formal feature request to properly shepherd the addition=20 of systemd as an optional init system for gentoo, including managing the=20 process of switching to it (and back again if desired). Thanks to all who participated in this thread...