Re: [gentoo-user] Re: --depclean wants to remove openrc. Yikes!

[Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>]

Hello, Rainer.

On Tue, Jul 27, 2021 at 11:28:05 +0200, Dr Rainer Woitok wrote:
> Alan,

> On Monday, 2021-07-26 19:01:21 +0000, you wrote:

> > ...
> > The warning was not very explicit.  An explicit warning would have said
> > "--depclean is capable of removing critical system packages".  As it
> > happened I didn't ignore the warning.  But some people might.

> > You seem to see nothing wrong with an OS being one keypress away from
> > destroying itself.  I do.

> You mentioned in an earlier post that you not  only got this warning for
> "openrc" but also for "nano".  I remember that after my first Gentoo in-
> stall ever,  I explicitly emerged  the packages  "vim"  (as an emergency
> fallback) and  -- more importantly --  "XEmacs" which were thus added to
> "@world".

Just as a matter of interest (I am an Emacs maintainer), are you still
using XEmacs?

> I then ran my very first  "emerge --ask --depclean"  and got that
> warning about "nano".  I do not remember the exact wording,  but --
> honestly -- I was startled.  Not very explicit?   When "emerge" is
> tell- ing me that removing "nano" might result in my system becoming
> unusable?  Or something to that effect?   Being a Gentoo novice then,
> I immediately replied "n", researched the webs, and then with a bit
> more knowledge and conscience I rerun "emerge --ask --depclean" and
> bravely typed "y".

> You were startled, too,  when reading that warning,  so where exactly is
> the problem?   Had I wanted a third editor  I'd have stuffed "nano" into
> "@world", but I didn't.  Since you want "openrc", you should.

The problem is that the documentation doesn't warn about the potential
loss of critical packages.  Only runtime messages which could easily
have scrolled off the screen.  Heck, when I first ran --depclean, there
were something like 220 packages to be removed.  It would be very easy
to have missed openrc.  (Shameless plug) only my kernel patch which
restores soft scroll enabled me to scroll back and see the warning.

The other problem is that, as (I think) Scott Adams, the creator of
Dilbert, has said, everybody is an idiot.  Just not 24 hours a day.  The
very fact that --depclean can remove the active init system means it
will catch somebody at a time when he is being an idiot.

I know I'm repeating myself, but I don't think an OS should ever delete
critical parts of itself unless explicitly requested by the user.
Perhaps not even then, but I wouldn't go that far.  The fact that
portage does this means IMHO that something has gone wrong.  Maybe
portage is too complicated, and people aren't aware of the lack of
safety catches.

> And yes,  some people tend to ignore warnings.   In particular, if there
> are just too many of them.

Yes.  I wonder just how many people really do read the "Waschzettel"
which accompanies all pharmaceuticals in Germany?  It takes some
commitment and patience to do so, but might be very important.

> I remember when back in the old days plenty of sources suggested to
> put  "alias rm='rm -i'"  into one's profile.   I always objected to
> this,  because you'd get so used to typing "y" to the plethora of
> questions  that you'd have  an excellent chance  to miss the one file
> which would have been worth retaining.

> So the most important rule  when working  with computers  still is "Read
> carefully, think carefully, then type carefully".  More warnings, bigger
> fonts or red colour simply don't cut it.  Or are you skimming your "gcc"
> compilation logs  after doing your weekly Gentoo upgrade for every warn-
> ing in order  to then check  the source code  to see whether  or not you
> should do anything about it?  I don't.

OK.  Respectfully, I think I disagree with you here.  Who'd have thought
it?  Two Gentoo users disagreeing about something.  ;-)

> My two cents ...

Much appreciated, thanks.

> Sincerely,
>   Rainer

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).