On 12/11/2013 08:47 PM, Chris Reffett wrote: > On 12/11/2013 3:41 PM, William Hubbs wrote: >> All, >> >> We got a request from Debian to rename the "rc" binary of OpenRC due to >> a naming conflict they have. They have a port of the at&t plan 9 shell, >> which has a binary named "rc" as well[1]. >> >> My thought is to rename our "rc" to "openrc", since that would be >> unique. >> >> I know at least one thing that will break is everyone's inittab, so >> should I sed their inittab in our live ebuild or expect them to fix it >> and give a warning? I know that once OpenRC with this change is >> released, it will need to probably be p.masked until there is a new >> release of sysvinit that updates the inittab. >> >> I'm not sure what else will break. >> >> Does anyone have any ideas wrt other things to look for, or should I >> make the changes upstream and have people let us know what >> else breaks? >> >> William >> >> [1] https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=493958 > The idea of running a sed on inittab in an ebuild, no matter what the > context, terrifies me. Perhaps we can ease this in slowly by renaming rc > -> openrc and symlinking rc -> openrc and making a release with that > change concurrent with a news item? Or even just do that in the ebuild > rather than in the actual sources. I don't think Debian will keel over > and die if it takes a little extra time for the change to go through, > and it beats a ton of broken systems. > > Chris Reffett > >
+1 The ebuild can grep the inittab and it if finds an "rc" there, just print a huge warning telling the user to migrate || die. -- Regards, Markos Chandras
