On 28/08/16 07:30, Daniel Campbell wrote: > On 08/24/2016 09:42 AM, Zac Medico wrote: >> On 08/24/2016 09:33 AM, Michael Orlitzky wrote: >>> * no benefit put forth so far, other than that it's the same file that >>> systemd uses, which is true but not beneficial as far as I can tell >> It's a de facto standard. Being different for the sake of being >> different is not a virtue in cases like this. >> > And doing things because "everyone else does it" is dumb, because it > precludes our ability to choose and makes us subject to the decisions > made outside of our distribution. Of course, as a distro we're subject > to outside decisions often, but what's the point of being a distro if > you're doing things the same way everyone else does? > > mjo made a good point. What if the meaning of /etc/hostname changes? Or > rather, what if the file gets moved altogether? All this effort to > "follow the flock" will lead to higher maintenance burden. Symlinking it > in pkg-postinst or some other mostly-automatic behavior makes sense > because then a package "owns" the file. Should an update happen where > the decision to follow the flock is rescinded, a revbump with the > symlinking line removed would cleanly get rid of the symlink without any > user intervention and next to zero maintenance burden. > > /etc/conf.d/hostname sits alongside multiple other files, including > hwclock, consolefont, localmount, fsck, modules, sshd, udev, etc. By > glancing at it, it's clear that /etc/conf.d/ relates to system (or > rather, package) configuration. > > Considering that OpenRC puts package configuration there, and OpenRC (by > default) looks for the hostname file in that directory, it's a > non-issue. Why should OpenRC look elsewhere for configuration when > there's already a place for it? > > If systemd or other inits need it, then they should install the file and > guess the initial value by sourcing /etc/conf.d/hostname. It's none of > OpenRC's concern what other inits need. +1
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
