Re: [gentoo-dev] Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users
El mié, 15-05-2013 a las 20:28 -0500, Matthew Thode escribió: > On 05/15/13 19:27, William Hubbs wrote: > > On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 10:16:01PM +0800, Ben de Groot wrote: > >> We don't control upstreams, but we still have choices. At this point I > >> only see Gnome and udev upstreams who are forcing their users to use > >> systemd. (There may be other projects too that I'm not aware of.) > > > > Udev doesn't force anything. In fact upstream makes it > > clear that udev can be run without systemd. > > > > William > > > so then we should decouple logind from udev downstream (packaging) :D > That is being handled in: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=461940 but help is needed on that :|
Re: [gentoo-dev] Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users
On 05/15/2013 07:26 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote: > On Wed, 15 May 2013 17:03:13 +0200 > Luca Barbato wrote: > >> On 05/15/2013 03:41 PM, Fabio Erculiani wrote: >>> ... GNOME ... >> >> And given that the end-plan according to the guys is to kill the >> distributions shall we just close Gentoo now? > > Let's not exaggerate things, there are a ton of other DEs out there; > are all of them starting to depend on systemd specific features? Luckily not, yet _that_'s what is in the roadmap apparently. > Whether or not it is terrible, it is a time sink; is it worth doing it? For any non-linux, less-than-3.x-linux, non-glibc system user probably. > Indeed, the goal here is solely to make "systemd more accessible"; we > shouldn't pursue it to be the main init system or force it upon users, > unless there are indicators in the future that it became better (eg. > supports BSD, ...) for everyone. And that has my support, there is disagreement on what that entitles. > Used GNOME for months, then with 3.6 - 3.8 it started to break on me; > it didn't work on either OpenRC or systemd. While I was a happy user at > first, recent events made me lose interest in it; I think a discussion > regarding init systems and similar software shouldn't be focused on a > single DE, so I too am not sure why focus is laid on GNOME here... Since it is the DE forcing all those changes down distribution throats. lu
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in mail-client/claws-mail: ChangeLog claws-mail-3.9.1.ebuild
Hi, Michał Górny : > > libnotify is only a fraction of the supported notification means of > > said plugin in Claws. > > Is the remaining fraction usable without libnotify on Gentoo? Yes. Regards V-Li -- Christian Faulhammer, Gentoo Lisp project http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/lisp/>, #gentoo-lisp on FreeNode http://gentoo.faulhammer.org/> signature.asc Description: PGP signature
[gentoo-dev] Re: Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users
Rich Freeman posted on Wed, 15 May 2013 10:01:57 -0400 as excerpted: > Gentoo is about choice, but that doesn't mean that every developer has > to support every possible choice on every package. ++ > Eudev not working with gnome is not a reason to hold back either > project. Not every option in Gentoo has to be compatible with every > other option. And in fact, that's already the case. > Eudev is welcome to stay even if its developers are its only users. ++ > I do agree in general that systemd seems pretty likely to take over, but > that doesn't mean that those who aren't running big desktop environments > can't make use of the alternatives, or that providing alternatives is > bad. I doubt you'll ever get Gnome 3.8 running on Prefix either. :) FWIW, of "the big two", gnome and kde seem to be going in totally opposite directions here. Gnome, in accord with their "there can be only one true way" tendencies, seems to be hell-bent on requiring systemd, which of course then pretty well eliminates gnome on other than Linux as well. Kde, OTOH, appears to be going totally opposite, more modular both with kde itself and with qt, thru the remaining gen-4 period and into gen-5 (qt5/kde5/kde-frameworks). Much of kde is even running on MS these days, and it appears they plan on continuing both their BSD support and expanding the MS presence and support, as they go more modular for kde frameworks and individual app devs consider it appropriate. As such, they're hard-rejecting a kde-wide hard-dep on systemd. Instead, while individual systemd management components, etc, will likely require it (which makes sense given that's what they're /for, kde's grub management module makes little sense without grub, after all), everything else will work with it if it's there, or with other existing system services if they are there instead. The same thing appears to be happening in kde for X and wayland. Wayland support is definitely planned, with an early tech-preview release set for this summer I'm told, but AFAIK there's no plans to drop X support at least thru gen-5, kde5/frameworks, and qt5 is of course already supporting X, wayland and MS Windows (among others), with its multiplatform support being a primary feature point so qt isn't likely to dump that or it would simply no longer be qt as we know it. Which leaves kde well positioned thru at least gen-5 to continue working and even expanding on all current platforms as well as chosen new ones. (FWIW, there are no plans at this point to support mir, however, as confirmed in a recent blog post.) So while it's likely that over time it'll become more and more difficult to support gnome on anything but systemd-running Linux, with that an official upstream requirement, kde's going exactly the opposite direction, and plans on continuing to support and even expand its support both for the bsds and on ms, as well as continuing X support and adding wayland as it matures. As such, they CANNOT hard-require systemd, and AFAIK aren't even planning on doing so on Linux, tho obviously kde does plan on supporting systemd for the distributions that run it. So of the traditional big-two DEs, gnome would appear to be the only one with an announced hard-requirement of systemd. I don't know what the "lighter" and traditionally anyway less popular gtk/gnome family of DEs, xfce, lxde, etc, are planning, but with kde going the opposite direction of gnome, it would seem a mistake to talk about the big DE's hard- requiring systemd, and it getting harder and harder to run them on anything else. Because really, that appears to be mainly gnome, only one of the big two. So a more accurate statement would be gnome-specific, since they've already announced systemd to be a hard requirement for them, going forward. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
Re: Re: [gentoo-dev] Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users
On 05/15/2013 08:41 AM, Fabio Erculiani wrote: > Are we realizing that in order to keep systemd out of our way, we're > currently writing and maintaining drop-in replacements for the > features that systemd is already providing in an actively maintained > state? openrc-settingsd was the first thing that we as Gentoo > developers (Pacho?) had to write in order to merge GNOME 3.6 into our > tree. > > And now that GNOME 3.8 is out, the game starts over again: logind is a > hard requirement, logind is part of systemd, starting logind (which > replaces consolekit) is not that trivial as you may think (and is the > thing I started to work on anyway). > > And if this wasn't enough, it means that if you want GNOME 3.8, you > need to get logind, which may or not may get included in our udev > ebuild and if it won't, it means that you will be forced to use > systemd as device manager if you want GNOME 3.8, which is believe it > or not, the thing that Ubuntu did. > > The problem will only increase in size as the clock moves. > > And (and!) how does all this fit together with eudev? If the idea is > to either put logind in udev (thus, not creating a separate logind > ebuild), it means that eudev is already a dead end for GNOME users, > unless the eudev team is going to provide logind as well. > > I don't want to start a flamewar here, I was the one who called > Lennart software lennartware, but science is science, and a reality > check had to be done: at some near point in the future, our users will > be forced to replace udev/eudev with systemd. Like it. Or not. > > While I successfully use both openrc and systemd, I _do_ think that > (and expect to see) more and more users (and developers) will be > switching to systemd. > Is there anything we can do? Besides "being prepared", I don't think so. > Do we control upstreams? No, sorry. > > So what do we want to do then? Isolate from the rest of the world? > (It's not a sarcastic question). I hope that everybody does their own > reality check. > The solution is to pressure upstreams not to depend on a specific init system in order to function. How many pieces of software depend on SysV, runit, openrc, or upstart? The only ones I can think of are the pieces that are designed specifically for making those init systems easier to administer, not user-facing software like desktop environments. I sincerely believe that each user and distro reserves the right to choose which software to boot the system with, and desktop environments and other user-facing software should not care about which init system it's running on. In the case of GNOME, I think they're going too far by depending on these things. GNOME devs haven't cared much for user responses (especially wrt GTK+ 3.x), so they are likely to continue integration with systemd. They're free to, but we're free to not use it, too. Personally, I will not have systemd on my box(es). I don't agree with its motives, its methods, or its design. I will not use software that depends on it. If the situation gets bad enough, then I may be forced to switch to another OS... that bothers me, to a degree, but as long as it's on my hardware, I have a say. It would not bother me if distros ostracized Lennart and his projects from the free software world, as he approaches free software with a toxic attitude. We wouldn't miss much IMO. As for Gentoo itself, I'm happy as long as choice remains the governing principle.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Package up for grabs: dev-libs/fcgi
On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 10:31 PM, Rafael Goncalves Martins < rafaelmart...@gentoo.org> wrote: > On Tue, May 14, 2013 at 3:06 PM, Hans de Graaff wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I thought I already dropped maintainership of this package a long time >> ago, since I haven't been using fastcgi for ages, but a new bug today >> told me I forgot. I've done so now. Someone please pick this up if you >> still use fastcgi. >> >> dev-libs/fcgi >> >> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=469794 is the one open bug about >> the AM_CONFIG_HEADER macro. >> >> Hans >> >> >> > I'm still using it. will get it if nobody gets until tomorrow :) > > Got it. -- Rafael Goncalves Martins Gentoo Linux developer http://rafaelmartins.eng.br/
Re: [gentoo-dev] Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users
On 05/15/13 20:20, William Hubbs wrote: > On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 02:18:13PM -0400, waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote: >> On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 03:41:31PM +0200, Fabio Erculiani wrote >>> Are we realizing that in order to keep systemd out of our way, we're >>> currently writing and maintaining drop-in replacements for the >>> features that systemd is already providing in an actively maintained >>> state? openrc-settingsd was the first thing that we as Gentoo >>> developers (Pacho?) had to write in order to merge GNOME 3.6 into our >>> tree. >> >> So Redhat, who are heavily into GNOME >> ( http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Red_Hat_contributions#GNOME_developers ) >> decided to make GNOME depend on other Redhat-developed software (systemd >> and pulseadio). Well... like... do... >> >> Question... when Sun made OpenOffice depend on Java (also a Sun >> product) did Gentoo developers run around suggesting that Java be made a >> part of the core Gentoo base system? I don't think so. If a user wants >> to run GNOME badly enough, he'll switch to systemd. I don't see why the >> rest of us (i.e. non-users of GNOME) should have to follow along and >> reconfigure our systems. This is a case of the tail wagging the dog. > > I don't interpret what he is saying that way. I think what he is > talking about is that we are trying to get teams to support non-systemd > setups when upstreams do not, like with gnome. > > Gnome now has a hard dependency on systemd (for gnome newer than 3.8). > Some folks want to use gnome without systemd and are putting that under > the gentoo is about choice banner and want us to support them. > >>> So what do we want to do then? Isolate from the rest of the world? >>> (It's not a sarcastic question). I hope that everybody does their >>> own reality check. >> >> You are effectively calling not-using-GNOME isolationist. Let's just >> say I disagree with you on that. BTW, see my sig. > > See above. > > William > If upstream gnome has that dep on systemd then I kinda think we should too (technical decision, not one I like personally) -- -- Matthew Thode (prometheanfire) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users
On 05/15/13 19:27, William Hubbs wrote: > On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 10:16:01PM +0800, Ben de Groot wrote: >> We don't control upstreams, but we still have choices. At this point I >> only see Gnome and udev upstreams who are forcing their users to use >> systemd. (There may be other projects too that I'm not aware of.) > > Udev doesn't force anything. In fact upstream makes it > clear that udev can be run without systemd. > > William > so then we should decouple logind from udev downstream (packaging) :D -- -- Matthew Thode (prometheanfire) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 02:18:13PM -0400, waltd...@waltdnes.org wrote: > On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 03:41:31PM +0200, Fabio Erculiani wrote > > Are we realizing that in order to keep systemd out of our way, we're > > currently writing and maintaining drop-in replacements for the > > features that systemd is already providing in an actively maintained > > state? openrc-settingsd was the first thing that we as Gentoo > > developers (Pacho?) had to write in order to merge GNOME 3.6 into our > > tree. > > So Redhat, who are heavily into GNOME > ( http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Red_Hat_contributions#GNOME_developers ) > decided to make GNOME depend on other Redhat-developed software (systemd > and pulseadio). Well... like... do... > > Question... when Sun made OpenOffice depend on Java (also a Sun > product) did Gentoo developers run around suggesting that Java be made a > part of the core Gentoo base system? I don't think so. If a user wants > to run GNOME badly enough, he'll switch to systemd. I don't see why the > rest of us (i.e. non-users of GNOME) should have to follow along and > reconfigure our systems. This is a case of the tail wagging the dog. I don't interpret what he is saying that way. I think what he is talking about is that we are trying to get teams to support non-systemd setups when upstreams do not, like with gnome. Gnome now has a hard dependency on systemd (for gnome newer than 3.8). Some folks want to use gnome without systemd and are putting that under the gentoo is about choice banner and want us to support them. > > So what do we want to do then? Isolate from the rest of the world? > > (It's not a sarcastic question). I hope that everybody does their > > own reality check. > > You are effectively calling not-using-GNOME isolationist. Let's just > say I disagree with you on that. BTW, see my sig. See above. William signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 10:56:21PM +0200, Alexander Berntsen wrote: > -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- > Hash: SHA256 > > On 15/05/13 17:10, Luca Barbato wrote: > > Those that can't use systemd: - those not using a recent linux > > kernel > And let's not forget those who aren't using Linux at all. I'm not really sure how relevant this is, because we can set up different default init systems based on the operating system in our tree easily enough. If we decide in the future to make the default init system on linux systemd, it is simple enough to make it OpenRC or whatever else on *bsd. William signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 10:16:01PM +0800, Ben de Groot wrote: > We don't control upstreams, but we still have choices. At this point I > only see Gnome and udev upstreams who are forcing their users to use > systemd. (There may be other projects too that I'm not aware of.) Udev doesn't force anything. In fact upstream makes it clear that udev can be run without systemd. William signature.asc Description: Digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 06:38:14PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote > It will probably be more than a decade before anybody is FORCED to run > systemd on Gentoo. You don't even have to run udev on Gentoo. > > It will probably be years before the default even changes, assuming > the trajectory of systemd remains as it seems to be. > > I think people are really getting carried away here. I believe the > udev team generally wants to follow upstream udev, and there is eudev > and busybox mdev for those who don't want that. No distro provides so > many ways of avoiding systemd. I don't see that changing anytime > soon. I was replyiny to a poster who said... > at some near point in the future, our users will be forced to replace > udev/eudev with systemd. Like it. Or not. You mentioned that it will be years before it happens. I realize that this borders on the political, but if nobody objects *NOW*, in a couple of years it'll happen. And the developers will say "but nobody objected". You're right that the process takes time. It's precisely because of that that unhappy users need to make their feelings known now before it's too late. -- Walter Dnes I don't run "desktop environments"; I run useful applications
Re: [gentoo-dev] Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users
On 05/15/13 16:01, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Wed, 15 May 2013 22:56:21 +0200 > Alexander Berntsen wrote: >> On 15/05/13 17:10, Luca Barbato wrote: >>> Those that can't use systemd: - those not using a recent linux >>> kernel > >> And let's not forget those who aren't using Linux at all. > > Why not? > > Troll mode engaged? -- -- Matthew Thode (prometheanfire) signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 2:18 PM, wrote: > Question... when Sun made OpenOffice depend on Java (also a Sun > product) did Gentoo developers run around suggesting that Java be made a > part of the core Gentoo base system? I don't think so. If a user wants > to run GNOME badly enough, he'll switch to systemd. I don't see why the > rest of us (i.e. non-users of GNOME) should have to follow along and > reconfigure our systems. This is a case of the tail wagging the dog. It will probably be more than a decade before anybody is FORCED to run systemd on Gentoo. You don't even have to run udev on Gentoo. It will probably be years before the default even changes, assuming the trajectory of systemd remains as it seems to be. I think people are really getting carried away here. I believe the udev team generally wants to follow upstream udev, and there is eudev and busybox mdev for those who don't want that. No distro provides so many ways of avoiding systemd. I don't see that changing anytime soon. This thread just started out asking maintainers to commit unit files when asked, that's all. Anybody who doesn't want them can mask them. If anybody feels eudev/openrc/whatever isn't progressing enough they can contribute improvements to these packages, or pay somebody else to do it for them. Developers work on what they want to work on. If no devs can be bothered with systemd then it will die on the vine, and if no developers choose to work on openrc the same will happen there. Either is unlikely, though the "market share" of either is likely to change over time. Rich
Re: [gentoo-dev] Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 03:41:31PM +0200, Fabio Erculiani wrote > Are we realizing that in order to keep systemd out of our way, we're > currently writing and maintaining drop-in replacements for the > features that systemd is already providing in an actively maintained > state? openrc-settingsd was the first thing that we as Gentoo > developers (Pacho?) had to write in order to merge GNOME 3.6 into our > tree. So Redhat, who are heavily into GNOME ( http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Red_Hat_contributions#GNOME_developers ) decided to make GNOME depend on other Redhat-developed software (systemd and pulseadio). Well... like... do... Question... when Sun made OpenOffice depend on Java (also a Sun product) did Gentoo developers run around suggesting that Java be made a part of the core Gentoo base system? I don't think so. If a user wants to run GNOME badly enough, he'll switch to systemd. I don't see why the rest of us (i.e. non-users of GNOME) should have to follow along and reconfigure our systems. This is a case of the tail wagging the dog. > So what do we want to do then? Isolate from the rest of the world? > (It's not a sarcastic question). I hope that everybody does their > own reality check. You are effectively calling not-using-GNOME isolationist. Let's just say I disagree with you on that. BTW, see my sig. -- Walter Dnes I don't run "desktop environments"; I run useful applications
Re: [gentoo-dev] Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 On Wed, 15 May 2013 22:56:21 +0200 Alexander Berntsen wrote: > On 15/05/13 17:10, Luca Barbato wrote: > > Those that can't use systemd: - those not using a recent linux > > kernel > > And let's not forget those who aren't using Linux at all. Why not? - -- Ciaran McCreesh -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlGT98MACgkQ96zL6DUtXhHnPACgqIhmnyvutdvIw0ijl4ralYyz cwMAn24EP4lpA/jHAdxAv6lx2e74qxy6 =68cT -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: [gentoo-dev] Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 15/05/13 17:10, Luca Barbato wrote: > Those that can't use systemd: - those not using a recent linux > kernel And let's not forget those who aren't using Linux at all. - -- Alexander alexan...@plaimi.net http://plaimi.net/~alexander -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ iF4EAREIAAYFAlGT9nUACgkQRtClrXBQc7UHiQD/R07lH+0F6ZARoODe2efrMVii w5Ok3kTjChpjkvLKjt8BAJIh8Rt+wmljyfT+yjj3WY2BfFWx4Vxkt2lom6V4G0A/ =NqLn -END PGP SIGNATURE-
[gentoo-dev] [PATCH multibuild.eclass] Use portable locking code from Fabian Groffen.
The 'userland_*' flags have proven not good enough to determine
the availability of lock helpers. Fabian provided a nice portable
locking code instead.
Fixes: https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=466554
---
gx86/eclass/multibuild.eclass | 29 +++--
1 file changed, 15 insertions(+), 14 deletions(-)
diff --git a/gx86/eclass/multibuild.eclass b/gx86/eclass/multibuild.eclass
index acfdbbd..819c814 100644
--- a/gx86/eclass/multibuild.eclass
+++ b/gx86/eclass/multibuild.eclass
@@ -251,38 +251,39 @@ multibuild_merge_root() {
local src=${1}
local dest=${2}
- local lockfile=${T}/multibuild_merge_lock
+ local lockfile=${T}/.multibuild_merge_lock
+ local lockfile_l=${lockfile}.${$}
local ret
+ # Lock the install tree for merge. The touch+ln method ensures race
+ # condition-free locking with maximum portability.
+ touch "${lockfile_l}" || die
+ until ln "${lockfile_l}" "${lockfile}" &>/dev/null; do
+ sleep 1
+ done
+ rm "${lockfile_l}" || die
+
if use userland_BSD; then
- # Locking is done by 'lockf' which can wrap a command.
# 'cp -a -n' is broken:
# http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=174489
# using tar instead which is universal but terribly slow.
tar -C "${src}" -f - -c . \
- | lockf "${lockfile}" tar -x -f - -C "${dest}"
+ | tar -x -f - -C "${dest}"
[[ ${PIPESTATUS[*]} == '0 0' ]]
ret=${?}
elif use userland_GNU; then
- # GNU has 'flock' which can't wrap commands but can lock
- # a fd which is good enough for us.
- # and cp works with '-a -n'.
-
- local lock_fd
- redirect_alloc_fd lock_fd "${lockfile}" '>>'
- flock ${lock_fd}
+ # cp works with '-a -n'.
cp -a -l -n "${src}"/. "${dest}"/
ret=${?}
-
- # Close the lock file when we are done with it.
- # Prevents deadlock if we aren't in a subshell.
- eval "exec ${lock_fd}>&-"
else
die "Unsupported userland (${USERLAND}), please report."
fi
+ # Remove the lock.
+ rm "${lockfile}" || die
+
if [[ ${ret} -ne 0 ]]; then
die "${MULTIBUILD_VARIANT:-(unknown)}: merging image failed."
fi
--
1.8.2.1
Re: [gentoo-dev] Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users
El mié, 15-05-2013 a las 15:02 -0400, Rich Freeman escribió: [...] > No comment on that... > > Maybe another way of saying things is that really the onus is on those > who want others to change their behavior to explain why they should > change. So, if you're seeking a change in behavior be up-front about > what change you want. If you're not seeking a change in behavior, > then there really isn't much point in going on unless it is to resist > a proposed change. > > Personally I think a reasonable balance is: > > 1. Maintainers do not have to take initiative to create systemd > units. (status quo) > 2. Maintainers should accept contributed units from the community, > even if they can't personally test them. This can be done at their > convenience. (slight addition in work for maintainers) > 3. Maintainers can ask users to contribute units upstream if not > already done. I don't think this should be a hard requirement (ie > accepting a non-upstreamed unit is not a QA violation). If upstream > makes this difficult this should not be an excuse for marking bugs > invalid. The goal is to work with upstream, not harass them. (some > more work for bug submitters and maintainers). > > Bottom line - maintainers don't have to go out of their way to support > systemd, but they should be friendly facilitators when others are > willing to do the work. This is no different from accepting desktop > entries and such even if you don't use a Freedesktop-compatible > environment. > > Rich > +1
Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCHES] distutils-r1: support 'edefault' in sub-phase functions
On Wed, 1 May 2013 22:42:05 +0200 Michał Górny wrote: > To make this more friendly, I would likely to locally introduce > 'edefault' function in the eclass (name can change). The function would > -- similarly to 'default' in regular phase functions -- call > the default code for the sub-phase. I've decided to withdraw the patch due to no interest from devs in the feature. If anyone feels like it would be useful, we can get back to it later. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] [PATCH eutils] prune_libtool_files: do not remove non-libtool .la files.
On Fri, 3 May 2013 17:54:36 +0200 Michał Górny wrote: > Let's assume that all libtool files have a consistent format and contain > a line stating 'shouldnotlink=(yes|no)'. We use that to distinguish > modules from libraries, so we can as well use it to validate the .la > file to avoid removing non-libtool .la files. I've committed the patch. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 2:11 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote: > On Wed, 15 May 2013 13:25:11 -0400 > Rich Freeman wrote: > >> In any case, there really isn't any "decision" to make here. > > Then for what purpose is this discussion still going on? > No comment on that... Maybe another way of saying things is that really the onus is on those who want others to change their behavior to explain why they should change. So, if you're seeking a change in behavior be up-front about what change you want. If you're not seeking a change in behavior, then there really isn't much point in going on unless it is to resist a proposed change. Personally I think a reasonable balance is: 1. Maintainers do not have to take initiative to create systemd units. (status quo) 2. Maintainers should accept contributed units from the community, even if they can't personally test them. This can be done at their convenience. (slight addition in work for maintainers) 3. Maintainers can ask users to contribute units upstream if not already done. I don't think this should be a hard requirement (ie accepting a non-upstreamed unit is not a QA violation). If upstream makes this difficult this should not be an excuse for marking bugs invalid. The goal is to work with upstream, not harass them. (some more work for bug submitters and maintainers). Bottom line - maintainers don't have to go out of their way to support systemd, but they should be friendly facilitators when others are willing to do the work. This is no different from accepting desktop entries and such even if you don't use a Freedesktop-compatible environment. Rich
Re: [gentoo-dev] Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users
On Wed, 15 May 2013 13:25:11 -0400 Rich Freeman wrote: > On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 12:59 PM, Tom Wijsman > wrote: > Don't take it personally or as an attack on systemd. I think he was > just pointing out that there are many use cases where systemd may not > be appropriate. In discussions, I try to not root for object X or Y but be constructive. > I'm sure if you pulled a glibc from 10 years ago there would be a > pretty good chance that systemd wouldn't work, but openrc is mainly > based on shell (not even bash), so it would be pretty likely to work. That is, if OpenRC is POSIX.1-2001 compatible; it doesn't use any APIs or programs developed in the last 10 years, it doesn't depend on a certain way a certain feature works that has changed in last 10 years. Agreed though, shell changes less often than glibc; but that's merely based on time, I can imagine in some point in the future there may be no need for further changes in glibc the same way POSIX stopped changing years ago; or in other words, it got standardized to be solid. Going back from those details to OpenRC and systemd, one could say that one tool depends on old and solid standards while the other depends on new and developing technologies; there are reasons enough to choose for either. Some things are better done by A, others by B. That's not what I'm after, I want to know when either A or B doesn't work; this is a matter of 1) trying to make it work for our users and 2) documenting it to our users in which occasions it doesn't work. Though, I went to take a look, if I were to trust the systemd ebuild it seems that it doesn't work with glibc versions prior to May 2009 (2.10) so I think we're in a quite good standing here; the amount of users that don't upgrade for four years that need systemd is likely minor, hence we don't need to document this and this doesn't form a problem. > Likewise if you picked a kernel from a few years ago systemd with all > its use of cgroups and such probably wouldn't work, while openrc is > simpler. Certainly if you picked a FreeBSD kernel systemd will not > work. (Keep in mind the set of systems not using a recent linux > kernel includes all systems that don't run linux at all.) I don't think the goal of making systemd more accessible has anything to do with people that don't upgrade for a few years; it doesn't stand in their way and given that it is out of the Portage tree we likely don't support these kind of practices anymore. Support is a big word and doesn't mean we don't try to help them if they have a solid case, but I can't see someone with <2006 hardware wanting to run GNOME 3.8. > In any case, there really isn't any "decision" to make here. Then for what purpose is this discussion still going on? > As long as devs want to support openrc it will be supported. > Likewise with eudev. As long as devs want to support systemd and > udev those will be options as well. The beauty of Gentoo is that more > than any distro it maximizes the options for our users. The changes > in Gnome may eliminate Gnome+openrc as a practical option, and when > those teams stop supporting the combo then users will have to make a > choice to not use one or the other. Gentoo is about choice, but that > doesn't mean that we have to offer EVERY possible choice. If > somebody wants to support my hp48 calculator as a Gentoo arch that > would be great, but that doesn't mean that I can sta hassling teams > to do the work for me. > > Gentoo is about working TOGETHER to provide choices, not about telling > others to make choices work for you. That's what I'm after, I have send a very similar mail two months ago. -- With kind regards, Tom Wijsman (TomWij) Gentoo Developer E-mail address : tom...@gentoo.org GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users
On Wed, 15 May 2013 17:03:13 +0200 Luca Barbato wrote: > On 05/15/2013 03:41 PM, Fabio Erculiani wrote: > > ... GNOME ... > > And given that the end-plan according to the guys is to kill the > distributions shall we just close Gentoo now? Let's not exaggerate things, there are a ton of other DEs out there; are all of them starting to depend on systemd specific features? > > And (and!) how does all this fit together with eudev? If the idea is > > to either put logind in udev (thus, not creating a separate logind > > ebuild), it means that eudev is already a dead end for GNOME users, > > unless the eudev team is going to provide logind as well. > > Is that so incredibly terrible write and maintain 1k loc? Whether or not it is terrible, it is a time sink; is it worth doing it? > > I don't want to start a flamewar here, I was the one who called > > Lennart software lennartware, but science is science, and a reality > > check had to be done: at some near point in the future, our users > > will be forced to replace udev/eudev with systemd. Like it. Or not. > > Science is science, systemd doesn't work with anything but linux, > Gentoo in theory should care about not-linux. Indeed, the goal here is solely to make "systemd more accessible"; we shouldn't pursue it to be the main init system or force it upon users, unless there are indicators in the future that it became better (eg. supports BSD, ...) for everyone. Whether upstreams will force users remains to be a question to me, this thread indicates a view from the GNOME users side; but that does not target the wide audience that uses other DEs. > > Is there anything we can do? Besides "being prepared", I don't > > think so. Do we control upstreams? No, sorry. > > I'm upstream for some stuff, vlc was already really close to > force-kill pulseaudio because of some cute problems, the thing got > otherwise fixed. Patches are still an option, and if patches become to tedious there is the possibility to fork in the worst caste; if there aren't either of those, we probably don't care enough to provide that piece of software to our users. There's a moment one has to stop caring about certain broken / incompatible pieces of software and throw them out. > Freebsd, openbsd and some other operating systems are still there, > they have their reasons and usually work better in those fields than > other, I'm sure some people would wish to kill them, not going to > happen anytime soon. It's better to be neutral than to pursue something you can't accomplish. > > So what do we want to do then? Isolate from the rest of the world? > > The world is bigger than that and we were making bridges around, *why* > severing them because somebody else decided for you? Indeed, I'd rather embrace than isolate; if something is useful for a large share of users, isolating us from it won't make anybody happy. > > (It's not a sarcastic question). I hope that everybody does their > > own reality check. > > Did mine, other experienced the hard way what I said many times. > > Gnome doesn't seem a good reason to leave in the cold people that do > not even care about it. Used GNOME for months, then with 3.6 - 3.8 it started to break on me; it didn't work on either OpenRC or systemd. While I was a happy user at first, recent events made me lose interest in it; I think a discussion regarding init systems and similar software shouldn't be focused on a single DE, so I too am not sure why focus is laid on GNOME here... -- With kind regards, Tom Wijsman (TomWij) Gentoo Developer E-mail address : tom...@gentoo.org GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 12:59 PM, Tom Wijsman wrote: > On Wed, 15 May 2013 17:10:03 +0200 > Luca Barbato wrote: > >> - those not using the latest glibc (and maybe uclibc) > > Did you test this? Are there more specific details regarding this? > Which version don't work? Is it known why? > >> - those not using a recent linux kernel > > It works on all gentoo-sources kernels (I test them), is 2.6 meant with > not recent or are these kernels even older? Those kind of people likely > don't care much about upgrading anyway and thus don't need systemd, but > they rather enjoy to have a system full of security issues. Don't take it personally or as an attack on systemd. I think he was just pointing out that there are many use cases where systemd may not be appropriate. I'm sure if you pulled a glibc from 10 years ago there would be a pretty good chance that systemd wouldn't work, but openrc is mainly based on shell (not even bash), so it would be pretty likely to work. Likewise if you picked a kernel from a few years ago systemd with all its use of cgroups and such probably wouldn't work, while openrc is simpler. Certainly if you picked a FreeBSD kernel systemd will not work. (Keep in mind the set of systems not using a recent linux kernel includes all systems that don't run linux at all.) In any case, there really isn't any "decision" to make here. As long as devs want to support openrc it will be supported. Likewise with eudev. As long as devs want to support systemd and udev those will be options as well. The beauty of Gentoo is that more than any distro it maximizes the options for our users. The changes in Gnome may eliminate Gnome+openrc as a practical option, and when those teams stop supporting the combo then users will have to make a choice to not use one or the other. Gentoo is about choice, but that doesn't mean that we have to offer EVERY possible choice. If somebody wants to support my hp48 calculator as a Gentoo arch that would be great, but that doesn't mean that I can start hassling teams to do the work for me. Gentoo is about working TOGETHER to provide choices, not about telling others to make choices work for you. Rich
Re: [gentoo-dev] Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users
On Wed, 15 May 2013 17:10:03 +0200 Luca Barbato wrote: > - those not using the latest glibc (and maybe uclibc) Did you test this? Are there more specific details regarding this? Which version don't work? Is it known why? > - those not using a recent linux kernel It works on all gentoo-sources kernels (I test them), is 2.6 meant with not recent or are these kernels even older? Those kind of people likely don't care much about upgrading anyway and thus don't need systemd, but they rather enjoy to have a system full of security issues. -- With kind regards, Tom Wijsman (TomWij) Gentoo Developer E-mail address : tom...@gentoo.org GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users
On 05/15/2013 05:03 PM, Luca Barbato wrote: > On 05/15/2013 03:41 PM, Fabio Erculiani wrote: >> Are we realizing that in order to keep systemd out of our way, we're >> currently writing and maintaining drop-in replacements for the >> features that systemd is already providing in an actively maintained >> state? openrc-settingsd was the first thing that we as Gentoo >> developers (Pacho?) had to write in order to merge GNOME 3.6 into our >> tree. To make it even clearer. In order to support a good amount of users out there that do not care about gnome and cannot use systemd we can see and bake alternatives that are compatible enough. Those that can't use systemd: - those not using the latest glibc (and maybe uclibc) - those not using a recent linux kernel - not sure about cgroups-users, the lxc vs systemd problem should be solved I hope That's what I'm aware of. lu
Re: [gentoo-dev] Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users
On 05/15/2013 03:41 PM, Fabio Erculiani wrote: > Are we realizing that in order to keep systemd out of our way, we're > currently writing and maintaining drop-in replacements for the > features that systemd is already providing in an actively maintained > state? openrc-settingsd was the first thing that we as Gentoo > developers (Pacho?) had to write in order to merge GNOME 3.6 into our > tree. > And now that GNOME 3.8 is out, the game starts over again: logind is a > hard requirement, logind is part of systemd, starting logind (which > replaces consolekit) is not that trivial as you may think (and is the > thing I started to work on anyway). > And if this wasn't enough, it means that if you want GNOME 3.8, you > need to get logind, which may or not may get included in our udev > ebuild and if it won't, it means that you will be forced to use > systemd as device manager if you want GNOME 3.8, which is believe it > or not, the thing that Ubuntu did. > The problem will only increase in size as the clock moves. And given that the end-plan according to the guys is to kill the distributions shall we just close Gentoo now? > And (and!) how does all this fit together with eudev? If the idea is > to either put logind in udev (thus, not creating a separate logind > ebuild), it means that eudev is already a dead end for GNOME users, > unless the eudev team is going to provide logind as well. Are there specifications regarding logind ? Is that so incredibly terrible write and maintain 1k loc? > I don't want to start a flamewar here, I was the one who called > Lennart software lennartware, but science is science, and a reality > check had to be done: at some near point in the future, our users will > be forced to replace udev/eudev with systemd. Like it. Or not. Science is science, systemd doesn't work with anything but linux, Gentoo in theory should care about not-linux. > While I successfully use both openrc and systemd, I _do_ think that > (and expect to see) more and more users (and developers) will be > switching to systemd. Surely sysadmins will be delighted about that. > Is there anything we can do? Besides "being prepared", I don't think so. > Do we control upstreams? No, sorry. I'm upstream for some stuff, vlc was already really close to force-kill pulseaudio because of some cute problems, the thing got otherwise fixed. Upstream does what is most sensible for the users, usually. Freebsd, openbsd and some other operating systems are still there, they have their reasons and usually work better in those fields than other, I'm sure some people would wish to kill them, not going to happen anytime soon. > So what do we want to do then? Isolate from the rest of the world? The world is bigger than that and we were making bridges around, *why* severing them because somebody else decided for you? > (It's not a sarcastic question). I hope that everybody does their own > reality check. Did mine, other experienced the hard way what I said many times. Gnome doesn't seem a good reason to leave in the cold people that do not even care about it. lu
Re: [gentoo-dev] Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On 15/05/13 10:16 AM, Ben de Groot wrote: > On 15 May 2013 21:41, Fabio Erculiani wrote: >> And (and!) how does all this fit together with eudev? If the idea >> is to either put logind in udev (thus, not creating a separate >> logind ebuild), it means that eudev is already a dead end for >> GNOME users, unless the eudev team is going to provide logind as >> well. > > I'm not sure what the eudev team is planning, but it's been > working well so far for me. And since I don't use Gnome, it's not > an issue as long as other desktop environments are not making the > same mistakes. > We don't know what we're planning either -- this is the first that I heard sys-fs/udev maintainers are considering bundling logind. Gut reaction is that eudev isn't going to do this, but the eudev team of course need to have an actual discussion and decision on it as a project. -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux) iF4EAREIAAYFAlGTovIACgkQ2ugaI38ACPDVZQD/dJUbQ9oMl9BAiMuM+SwtETad PkhRLDVaBEN2FqwXFQIA/3wPouBLnzHT1p1uNL5zfcc8Hf/RgFoKKbaZ/deZM6s2 =xukU -END PGP SIGNATURE-
[gentoo-dev] CPU use flag detection
Hi, I was recently investigating what cpu flags do I have and how does it work. I have put what I have so far at [1]. So I thought I let you know in case someone wants to chip in. [1] https://github.com/yaccz/cufd
Re: [gentoo-dev] Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users
On 15 May 2013 21:41, Fabio Erculiani wrote: > Are we realizing that in order to keep systemd out of our way, we're > currently writing and maintaining drop-in replacements for the > features that systemd is already providing in an actively maintained > state? openrc-settingsd was the first thing that we as Gentoo > developers (Pacho?) had to write in order to merge GNOME 3.6 into our > tree. It's well known that Gnome is part and parcel of the whole vertical integration circus. > And (and!) how does all this fit together with eudev? If the idea is > to either put logind in udev (thus, not creating a separate logind > ebuild), it means that eudev is already a dead end for GNOME users, > unless the eudev team is going to provide logind as well. I'm not sure what the eudev team is planning, but it's been working well so far for me. And since I don't use Gnome, it's not an issue as long as other desktop environments are not making the same mistakes. > I don't want to start a flamewar here, I was the one who called > Lennart software lennartware, but science is science, and a reality > check had to be done: at some near point in the future, our users will > be forced to replace udev/eudev with systemd. Like it. Or not. This isn't science. And unless you use Gnome, I don't see why we would be forced to use systemd. KDE, Xfce, LXDE and Razor-qt are still happy to support non-systemd operating systems. The way I see it is that Gnome is making itself more of a non-option on Gentoo, Slackware and BSD systems. > While I successfully use both openrc and systemd, I _do_ think that > (and expect to see) more and more users (and developers) will be > switching to systemd. > Is there anything we can do? Besides "being prepared", I don't think so. > Do we control upstreams? No, sorry. We don't control upstreams, but we still have choices. At this point I only see Gnome and udev upstreams who are forcing their users to use systemd. (There may be other projects too that I'm not aware of.) > So what do we want to do then? Isolate from the rest of the world? > (It's not a sarcastic question). I hope that everybody does their own > reality check. We say that Gentoo stands for choice. That is why we should resist allowing systemd (and Gnome) to take those choices away with their mistaken idea of vertical integration. We do have other options. -- Cheers, Ben | yngwin Gentoo developer
Re: [gentoo-dev] Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users
El mié, 15-05-2013 a las 15:41 +0200, Fabio Erculiani escribió: > Are we realizing that in order to keep systemd out of our way, we're > currently writing and maintaining drop-in replacements for the > features that systemd is already providing in an actively maintained > state? openrc-settingsd was the first thing that we as Gentoo > developers (Pacho?) had to write in order to merge GNOME 3.6 into our > tree. Tetromino is the expert in openrc-settingsd I think, I don't know much about it :S > > And now that GNOME 3.8 is out, the game starts over again: logind is a > hard requirement, logind is part of systemd, starting logind (which > replaces consolekit) is not that trivial as you may think (and is the > thing I started to work on anyway). > > And if this wasn't enough, it means that if you want GNOME 3.8, you > need to get logind, which may or not may get included in our udev > ebuild and if it won't, it means that you will be forced to use > systemd as device manager if you want GNOME 3.8, which is believe it > or not, the thing that Ubuntu did. Ubuntu is installing systemd to get their "udev" and "logind"... but still using upstart (with gnome 3.8 packages) But, well, I think the easiest solution would be to move to systemd and run the parts we need from it even still booting with openrc
Re: [gentoo-dev] Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 9:41 AM, Fabio Erculiani wrote: > And (and!) how does all this fit together with eudev? If the idea is > to either put logind in udev (thus, not creating a separate logind > ebuild), it means that eudev is already a dead end for GNOME users, > unless the eudev team is going to provide logind as well. I picked this paragraph to quote, but this is more of an overall response to your email. Gentoo is about choice, but that doesn't mean that every developer has to support every possible choice on every package. Eudev not working with gnome is not a reason to hold back either project. Not every option in Gentoo has to be compatible with every other option. Eudev is welcome to stay even if its developers are its only users. I do agree in general that systemd seems pretty likely to take over, but that doesn't mean that those who aren't running big desktop environments can't make use of the alternatives, or that providing alternatives is bad. I doubt you'll ever get Gnome 3.8 running on Prefix either. :) Rich
Re: [gentoo-dev] Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users
Are we realizing that in order to keep systemd out of our way, we're currently writing and maintaining drop-in replacements for the features that systemd is already providing in an actively maintained state? openrc-settingsd was the first thing that we as Gentoo developers (Pacho?) had to write in order to merge GNOME 3.6 into our tree. And now that GNOME 3.8 is out, the game starts over again: logind is a hard requirement, logind is part of systemd, starting logind (which replaces consolekit) is not that trivial as you may think (and is the thing I started to work on anyway). And if this wasn't enough, it means that if you want GNOME 3.8, you need to get logind, which may or not may get included in our udev ebuild and if it won't, it means that you will be forced to use systemd as device manager if you want GNOME 3.8, which is believe it or not, the thing that Ubuntu did. The problem will only increase in size as the clock moves. And (and!) how does all this fit together with eudev? If the idea is to either put logind in udev (thus, not creating a separate logind ebuild), it means that eudev is already a dead end for GNOME users, unless the eudev team is going to provide logind as well. I don't want to start a flamewar here, I was the one who called Lennart software lennartware, but science is science, and a reality check had to be done: at some near point in the future, our users will be forced to replace udev/eudev with systemd. Like it. Or not. While I successfully use both openrc and systemd, I _do_ think that (and expect to see) more and more users (and developers) will be switching to systemd. Is there anything we can do? Besides "being prepared", I don't think so. Do we control upstreams? No, sorry. So what do we want to do then? Isolate from the rest of the world? (It's not a sarcastic question). I hope that everybody does their own reality check. -- Fabio Erculiani
Re: [gentoo-dev] Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users
I'll start answering from the last point since it explains the remaining answers. Sorry for the shuffle. On Tue, 14 May 2013 10:41:27 +0200 Luca Barbato wrote: > On 05/10/2013 09:45 AM, Ralph Sennhauser wrote: > > [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging:Systemd#Unit_Files > > In the end initscripts are usually distribution dependent since they are > an integration step. Integration? What kind of integration? The kind of integration which results in various apps behaving differently depending on the patch set used by distro? The kind of integration which makes performing *simple* administrative tasks completely distro-dependant? Seriously, I don't remember anymore how to enable services on openrc. And I don't want to get back to the point when approach a computer with Arch required me to find out how the necessary tools are named there. That said, Gentoo init.d scripts are an aberration. Either they resemble poor hacks to change application behavior, provide additional configuration or setup. Isn't init script supposed to *start* an application? When init scripts start to source additional code from external files, poorly parse configuration files and reset databases, I believe we reached the point of 'done seriously wrong'. And someone mentioned that automatic restart of service is dangerous... > What if openrc/upstart/runit devs start harassing upstream in the same way? > > Strategically is great, but isn't exactly something nice to do. > > Probably people caring about alternatives should start bothering > upstreams likewise and we'll see how it goes. Strategically? So we're now at war? Yes, I've noticed the few people fancying a pile of hacks complaining about the 'so-wrong' systemd breaking the unwritten rules of having a distro-specific pile of hacks and trying to improve something for the sake of uniformity. The point is that openrc/upstart/runit devs never cared enough. Maybe they fancied their total control over init scripts or didn't feel influential enough, I don't know. Now that we have something that actually was designed with that point in consideration, we have crybabies shouting 'but please use my init.d instead! it's so much better because i used it'. The major difference would be that systemd is something new, not just the pile of hacks that has grown a lot of functionality over time. > I'm sure that *everybody* would be delighted to provide those 4-5 > different initscripts because one distribution or the other wants others > do the work for them... Does it really? I more feel like it specifically doesn't want others to touch their precious init scripts. > I'm saying again that trying to get a good intermediate representation > and have a generator (eselect based maybe) provide the init-specific > file would be much better. Did you see how systemd unit files look like? What kind of intermediate representation do you want? I don't expect service descriptions to go much simpler than this. Of course, you could just mangle the names, change the format. Do that for the sake of making things harder for others. Show how offended you are by others not wanting your fancy init.d! And eselect, of course. Another distro-specific pile of hacks which doesn't do anything specific. I wonder if we will have to wait for Fedora to replace it. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
