Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 4:31 PM, Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote: equery f udev | grep udevd /usr/lib/systemd/systemd-udevd And as long as our maintainers refuse to use the proper paths this is just one of the little things that makes life more exciting for us. Can we please add some sanity back? The gods heard your call, and have replied: Yes, udev on non-systemd systems is in our eyes a dead end, in case you haven't noticed it yet. I am looking forward to the day when we can drop that support entirely. -- Lennart [1] [1] http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/systemd-devel/2012-August/006066.html
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On 08/08/2012 04:53 PM, Michał Górny wrote: Yes, and please remove all the occurrences of 'GNU' because I don't like it. We have people working on a clang/freebsd gentoo, you might help them and use that. It sort of works fine. For a project Flameeyes replaced most of system using smaller alternatives to most of the gnu runtime. I'm helping getting musl as a first class libc in Gentoo, if uclibc feels too GNU-ish for you. As strange as it might feel for you we have people working on providing alternatives that might be useful for specific purposes. lu
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On Thu, 09 Aug 2012 10:48:38 +0200 Luca Barbato lu_z...@gentoo.org wrote: On 08/08/2012 04:53 PM, Michał Górny wrote: Yes, and please remove all the occurrences of 'GNU' because I don't like it. We have people working on a clang/freebsd gentoo, you might help them and use that. It sort of works fine. For a project Flameeyes replaced most of system using smaller alternatives to most of the gnu runtime. I'm helping getting musl as a first class libc in Gentoo, if uclibc feels too GNU-ish for you. As strange as it might feel for you we have people working on providing alternatives that might be useful for specific purposes. No. I meant to have 'GNU' tools with 'GNU' stripped. Isn't that what the whole discussion is about? Changing names of tools just for someone's liking? -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On 08/09/2012 10:57 AM, Michał Górny wrote: No. I meant to have 'GNU' tools with 'GNU' stripped. Isn't that what the whole discussion is about? Changing names of tools just for someone's liking? No, we are discussing about an upstream merging two unrelated projects assuring users that nothing would change for them. In a week they claimed that it was unsupported, then backpedaled, then they changed its paths. Forking udev hadn't been considered mostly just on that premise. lu
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On Thu, 09 Aug 2012 11:20:52 +0200 Luca Barbato lu_z...@gentoo.org wrote: On 08/09/2012 10:57 AM, Michał Górny wrote: No. I meant to have 'GNU' tools with 'GNU' stripped. Isn't that what the whole discussion is about? Changing names of tools just for someone's liking? No, we are discussing about an upstream merging two unrelated projects assuring users that nothing would change for them. In a week they claimed that it was unsupported, then backpedaled, then they changed its paths. Forking udev hadn't been considered mostly just on that premise. So someone should just *finally* fork it, rather than talking about it all the time. And I believe that renaming executables won't undo the merge. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 6:01 AM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote: On Thu, 09 Aug 2012 11:20:52 +0200 Luca Barbato lu_z...@gentoo.org wrote: Forking udev hadn't been considered mostly just on that premise. So someone should just *finally* fork it, rather than talking about it all the time. ++ If the sky actually starts falling there are things we can do about it. Until then, running around yelling about it isn't terribly productive. There is this great fear about what udev MIGHT do. Well, if they do it then lots of of people will fork it if systemd isn't universally embraced as the ultimate init replacement. However, right now everybody is worried about a future that may or may not happen, or which may or may not be welcomed with open arms by the time it does. In the meantime I imagine most Gentoo packages will at least ship openrc init scripts, if they bother to ship init scripts at all. There isn't any requirement that packages have them, afaik, so if somebody ships a systemd unit but not an openrc script let's be careful about pulling out the pitchforks. :) Rich
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On 08/09/2012 12:20 PM, Luca Barbato wrote: On 08/09/2012 10:57 AM, Michał Górny wrote: No. I meant to have 'GNU' tools with 'GNU' stripped. Isn't that what the whole discussion is about? Changing names of tools just for someone's liking? No, we are discussing about an upstream merging two unrelated projects assuring users that nothing would change for them. In a week they claimed that it was unsupported, then backpedaled, then they changed its paths. (picked near random mail from the thread) sep. /usr was not supported prior to renaming and $udevdir has been dynamic from the udev.pc pkg-config file for long as I can remember therefore the renaming and path change is merely cosmetics to which *users* don't need to pay attention to so yeah, this whole thread is just that, trying to introduce regression due to personal preference 187-r3 does it right and after fixing the few hardcoded paths in tree, we can drop the 2 patches and backwards compability i'm nearly done with pushing fixes to drop the few known hardcoded paths we have in tree, and about to ask for a tinderbox run to catch the rest (which can take it's time, the patches are there, as mentioned) so help is welcome with the migration[1], see eg. usb_modeswitch, libmtp, udisks:0, udisks:2 (configure.ac), etc. for example [1] this is about using non-hardcoded paths and respecting udev.pc set udevdir=, not really about migrating, so even if the move wasn't happening, these have always been bugs of sort - Samuli
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On 08/09/2012 12:01 PM, Michał Górny wrote: On Thu, 09 Aug 2012 11:20:52 +0200 Luca Barbato lu_z...@gentoo.org wrote: On 08/09/2012 10:57 AM, Michał Górny wrote: No. I meant to have 'GNU' tools with 'GNU' stripped. Isn't that what the whole discussion is about? Changing names of tools just for someone's liking? No, we are discussing about an upstream merging two unrelated projects assuring users that nothing would change for them. In a week they claimed that it was unsupported, then backpedaled, then they changed its paths. Forking udev hadn't been considered mostly just on that premise. So someone should just *finally* fork it, rather than talking about it all the time. I had that[1] since ages, mostly because I was curious about how complex udev is internally. If enough people want to play this game welcome. I expect the same people stomping on mdev complaining about the next little experiment. https://github.com/lu-zero/udev lu
[gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
Hi, Sorry if this has been discussed to death, but I couldn't find any definitive decisions on it, so I thought I'd mention things in a fairly simple manner: Step 1: I use OpenRC/sysvinit. Dell ~ # readlink -f /proc/1/exe /sbin/init Dell ~ # equery b /sbin/init * Searching for /sbin/init ... sys-apps/sysvinit-2.88-r3 (/sbin/init) Step 2: There are lots of systemd service files installed. Dell ~ # ls /usr/lib/systemd/system/*.service|wc -l 21 Step 3: What on earth is installing them? Dell ~ # equery b /usr/lib/systemd/system/*.service media-libs/libcanberra-0.29 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/canberra-system-shutdown-reboot.service) media-libs/libcanberra-0.29 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/canberra-system-bootup.service) media-libs/libcanberra-0.29 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/canberra-system-shutdown.service) media-sound/alsa-utils-1.0.25-r2 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/alsa-restore.service) media-sound/alsa-utils-1.0.25-r2 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/alsa-store.service) net-misc/dhcpcd-5.5.6 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/dhcpcd.service) net-misc/openssh-6.0_p1-r1 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/sshd@.service) net-misc/openssh-6.0_p1-r1 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/sshd.service) net-wireless/bluez-4.101-r1 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/bluetooth.service) net-wireless/wpa_supplicant-1.0 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/wpa_supplicant.service) net-wireless/wpa_supplicant-1.0 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/wpa_supplicant@.service) sys-apps/dbus-1.6.4 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/dbus.service) sys-auth/consolekit-0.4.5_p20120320 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/console-kit-log-system-start.service) sys-auth/consolekit-0.4.5_p20120320 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/console-kit-daemon.service) sys-auth/consolekit-0.4.5_p20120320 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/console-kit-log-system-restart.service) sys-auth/consolekit-0.4.5_p20120320 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/console-kit-log-system-stop.service) sys-auth/polkit-0.107 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/polkit.service) sys-fs/udev-187-r1 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/systemd-udev-trigger.service) sys-fs/udev-187-r1 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/systemd-udev-settle.service) sys-fs/udev-187-r1 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/systemd-udevd.service) sys-power/upower-0.9.17-r1 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/upower.service) Yowza! All the packages that provide systemd unit files are installing them?! But I don't even use systemd. I don't want this cruft on my system. Proposal: global USE flag for systemd, just like there's one for openrc. Thanks, Jason
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On Wed, 8 Aug 2012 15:11:42 +0200 Jason A. Donenfeld ja...@zx2c4.com wrote: Sorry if this has been discussed to death, but I couldn't find any definitive decisions on it, so I thought I'd mention things in a fairly simple manner: Step 1: I use OpenRC/sysvinit. Dell ~ # readlink -f /proc/1/exe /sbin/init Dell ~ # equery b /sbin/init * Searching for /sbin/init ... sys-apps/sysvinit-2.88-r3 (/sbin/init) Step 2: There are lots of systemd service files installed. Dell ~ # ls /usr/lib/systemd/system/*.service|wc -l 21 Step 3: What on earth is installing them? Dell ~ # equery b /usr/lib/systemd/system/*.service media-libs/libcanberra-0.29 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/canberra-system-shutdown-reboot.service) media-libs/libcanberra-0.29 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/canberra-system-bootup.service) media-libs/libcanberra-0.29 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/canberra-system-shutdown.service) media-sound/alsa-utils-1.0.25-r2 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/alsa-restore.service) media-sound/alsa-utils-1.0.25-r2 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/alsa-store.service) net-misc/dhcpcd-5.5.6 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/dhcpcd.service) net-misc/openssh-6.0_p1-r1 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/sshd@.service) net-misc/openssh-6.0_p1-r1 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/sshd.service) net-wireless/bluez-4.101-r1 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/bluetooth.service) net-wireless/wpa_supplicant-1.0 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/wpa_supplicant.service) net-wireless/wpa_supplicant-1.0 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/wpa_supplicant@.service) sys-apps/dbus-1.6.4 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/dbus.service) sys-auth/consolekit-0.4.5_p20120320 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/console-kit-log-system-start.service) sys-auth/consolekit-0.4.5_p20120320 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/console-kit-daemon.service) sys-auth/consolekit-0.4.5_p20120320 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/console-kit-log-system-restart.service) sys-auth/consolekit-0.4.5_p20120320 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/console-kit-log-system-stop.service) sys-auth/polkit-0.107 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/polkit.service) sys-fs/udev-187-r1 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/systemd-udev-trigger.service) sys-fs/udev-187-r1 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/systemd-udev-settle.service) sys-fs/udev-187-r1 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/systemd-udevd.service) sys-power/upower-0.9.17-r1 (/usr/lib/systemd/system/upower.service) Yowza! All the packages that provide systemd unit files are installing them?! But I don't even use systemd. I don't want this cruft on my system. Proposal: global USE flag for systemd, just like there's one for openrc. INSTALL_MASK=/usr/lib/systemd And live happy to the day you notice your system no longer boots. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote: INSTALL_MASK=/usr/lib/systemd And live happy to the day you notice your system no longer boots. This is a nice bandaid, and sure, it solves the immediate issue... but it doesn't actually solve the actual issue: when packages optionally install unwanted bloat, we make them an option via a USE flag. In this case, especially, since systemd isn't even the default (nor officially supported, whatever that amounts to), users certainly should not have to manually add an install mask to make portage do what it already should do. Besides, as systemd gains momentum, we can probably expect that various pieces of software will have options to enable a systemd mode or a systemd build, or what have you, and then in this case, a global USE flag becomes even more imperative.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote: INSTALL_MASK=/usr/lib/systemd As an unrelated side note, in case any one on the internet finds this thread trying to solve this issue, it's worth pointing out that since udev now installs that directory, the INSTALL_MASK should actually be /usr/lib/systemd/system.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On 08/08/12 22:15, Michał Górny wrote: On Wed, 8 Aug 2012 15:11:42 +0200 Jason A. Donenfeld ja...@zx2c4.com wrote: [snip] Yowza! All the packages that provide systemd unit files are installing them?! But I don't even use systemd. I don't want this cruft on my system. Proposal: global USE flag for systemd, just like there's one for openrc. INSTALL_MASK=/usr/lib/systemd And live happy to the day you notice your system no longer boots. That doesn't work anymore - improvement in udev-186: equery f udev | grep udevd /usr/lib/systemd/systemd-udevd And as long as our maintainers refuse to use the proper paths this is just one of the little things that makes life more exciting for us. Can we please add some sanity back?
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On Wed, 08 Aug 2012 22:31:40 +0800 Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote: On 08/08/12 22:15, Michał Górny wrote: On Wed, 8 Aug 2012 15:11:42 +0200 Jason A. Donenfeld ja...@zx2c4.com wrote: [snip] Yowza! All the packages that provide systemd unit files are installing them?! But I don't even use systemd. I don't want this cruft on my system. Proposal: global USE flag for systemd, just like there's one for openrc. INSTALL_MASK=/usr/lib/systemd And live happy to the day you notice your system no longer boots. That doesn't work anymore - improvement in udev-186: equery f udev | grep udevd /usr/lib/systemd/systemd-udevd Yes, sorry, I was lazy and didn't add '/system' there. Forgot about udev. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 4:31 PM, Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote: And as long as our maintainers refuse to use the proper paths this is just one of the little things that makes life more exciting for us. Can we please add some sanity back? Exactly. Right now, with no USE flag, and no differentiation, maintainers are kind of just stepping on each others toes. There's simply no protocol for dealing with the increasingly aggressive upstream systemdification. With a global USE flags, maintainers can then think about things in terms of okay, the systemd world likes it this way; the rest of the world likes it this way... therefore: use systemd kitten_killer.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On Wed, 8 Aug 2012 16:22:47 +0200 Jason A. Donenfeld ja...@zx2c4.com wrote: On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote: INSTALL_MASK=/usr/lib/systemd As an unrelated side note, in case any one on the internet finds this thread trying to solve this issue, it's worth pointing out that since udev now installs that directory, the INSTALL_MASK should actually be /usr/lib/systemd/system. You are right. In case users really intend to use that, they may be better using app-portage/install-mask, and: $ install-mask -a systemd which will add just the right path. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote: You are right. In case users really intend to use that, they may be better using app-portage/install-mask, and: $ install-mask -a systemd which will add just the right path. Still misses the point. USE flags were invented to deal with these options. On a default install, which uses OpenRC, users shouldn't have to then emerge an additional program to add more configuration in order to have a clean system.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On Wed, 8 Aug 2012 16:20:55 +0200 Jason A. Donenfeld ja...@zx2c4.com wrote: On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 4:15 PM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote: INSTALL_MASK=/usr/lib/systemd And live happy to the day you notice your system no longer boots. This is a nice bandaid, and sure, it solves the immediate issue... but it doesn't actually solve the actual issue: when packages optionally install unwanted bloat, we make them an option via a USE flag. In this case, especially, since systemd isn't even the default (nor officially supported, whatever that amounts to), users certainly should not have to manually add an install mask to make portage do what it already should do. Besides, as systemd gains momentum, we can probably expect that various pieces of software will have options to enable a systemd mode or a systemd build, or what have you, and then in this case, a global USE flag becomes even more imperative. The flag is there already, and it is used whenever it involves additional dependencies or in any other way makes the package incompatible with non-systemd systems. We aren't going to add USE flags which don't do anything. That topic was discussed a thousand times, and rising it once more won't change our decision. Similarly, bash-completion flag will be gone at some point. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 4:36 PM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote: We aren't going to add USE flags which don't do anything. That topic was discussed a thousand times, and rising it once more won't change our decision. Similarly, bash-completion flag will be gone at some point. Everyone has bash. Not everyone has systemd.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On 08/08/2012 10:31 AM, Patrick Lauer wrote: On 08/08/12 22:15, Michał Górny wrote: On Wed, 8 Aug 2012 15:11:42 +0200 Jason A. Donenfeld ja...@zx2c4.com wrote: [snip] Yowza! All the packages that provide systemd unit files are installing them?! But I don't even use systemd. I don't want this cruft on my system. Proposal: global USE flag for systemd, just like there's one for openrc. INSTALL_MASK=/usr/lib/systemd And live happy to the day you notice your system no longer boots. That doesn't work anymore - improvement in udev-186: equery f udev | grep udevd /usr/lib/systemd/systemd-udevd And as long as our maintainers refuse to use the proper paths this is just one of the little things that makes life more exciting for us. Can we please add some sanity back? I second this suggestion. signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On Wed, 8 Aug 2012 16:35:22 +0200 Jason A. Donenfeld ja...@zx2c4.com wrote: On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote: You are right. In case users really intend to use that, they may be better using app-portage/install-mask, and: $ install-mask -a systemd which will add just the right path. Still misses the point. USE flags were invented to deal with these options. On a default install, which uses OpenRC, users shouldn't have to then emerge an additional program to add more configuration in order to have a clean system. No, they weren't. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On 08/08/12 22:35, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote: You are right. In case users really intend to use that, they may be better using app-portage/install-mask, and: $ install-mask -a systemd which will add just the right path. Still misses the point. USE flags were invented to deal with these options. On a default install, which uses OpenRC, users shouldn't have to then emerge an additional program to add more configuration in order to have a clean system. And while we're at it - can we *please* use the openrc useflag to have correct paths and binary names again? Just because upstream says we should be fedora doesn't mean we have to do it. Right now it's really frustrating to have systemd artifacts all over my system even when I explicitly ask for it to not be near it. Very rude. Very not Gentoo.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On Wed, 8 Aug 2012 16:38:07 +0200 Jason A. Donenfeld ja...@zx2c4.com wrote: On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 4:36 PM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote: We aren't going to add USE flags which don't do anything. That topic was discussed a thousand times, and rising it once more won't change our decision. Similarly, bash-completion flag will be gone at some point. Everyone has bash. Not everyone has systemd. Not everyone uses bash. Not everyone cares at all about bash-completion. What is your point? -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 10:38 AM, Jason A. Donenfeld ja...@zx2c4.com wrote: On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 4:36 PM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote: We aren't going to add USE flags which don't do anything. That topic was discussed a thousand times, and rising it once more won't change our decision. Similarly, bash-completion flag will be gone at some point. Everyone has bash. Not everyone has systemd. Then why does OpenRC go out of its way to avoid depending on bash? The answer is that not everybody has bash. In any case, this has been discussed on -dev before. The reason that the unit files were not made a use flag was that they're just simple text files that don't take much space and don't do anything unless you use systemd. Having a USE flag to trigger their install doesn't have much of a point, and it also means that to switch to systemd you'd have to re-emerge anything that installs a unit file. If we went this route we'd end up adding an openrc use flag for anything that sticks files in /etc/init.d, bash-completion, and probably a bunch of other stuff as well. If a package is pulling in dependencies that is a different story, but if we're just talking about a text file I think a USE flag is overkill. Rich
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 4:45 PM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote: Not everyone uses bash. Not everyone cares at all about bash-completion. What is your point? I'm not saying I agree with the removal of bash-completion flag (that discussion is for elsewhere), but just that your analogy doesn't hold. zx2c4@Dell /usr/lib/systemd $ equery d bash|grep portage sys-apps/portage-2.2.0_alpha120
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On N, 1970-01-01 at 00:00 +, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote: You are right. In case users really intend to use that, they may be better using app-portage/install-mask, and: $ install-mask -a systemd which will add just the right path. Still misses the point. USE flags were invented to deal with these options. On a default install, which uses OpenRC, users shouldn't have to then emerge an additional program to add more configuration in order to have a clean system. USE flags are not meant for controlling every little thing, such as conditional installing a 400 byte file that does no harm when not used, other than taking 1 block of filesystem space (4kB or so), which can be workarounded by INSTALL_MASK if you are building an embedded system. I seriously doubt they were invented for such a purpose, but rather to control ./configure arguments and external dependencies. No, wanting to get rid of those on a desktop/server via a USE flag (as opposed to an INSTALL_MASK) is not a consideration, as that's users completely unneeded desire for no technical reason. If taking 500kB total for systemd service files is an issue, then the issue really is that you are using a 1GB /usr partition or something. This all is similar to how we in GNOME unconditionally install user and developer documentation, as long as it does not impose any extra build time or downloads. (no, this is not really negotiable for change, and we are talking about more than 400 byte files here; we'd be happy however if portage binary packages supported splitting of the source packages files to separate packages, so that binary distribution derivatives could work in a similar model as purely binary distributions) USE flags typically control the functionality of compiled binaries, usually involving external dependencies to achieve such extra functionality. http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-x86.xml?part=2chap=2#doc_chap1_sect2 Best Regards, Mart Raudsepp
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 4:48 PM, Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote: can we *please* use the openrc useflag to have correct paths and binary names again? Just because upstream says we should be fedora doesn't mean we have to do it. Right now it's really frustrating to have systemd artifacts all over my system even when I explicitly ask for it to not be near it. Very rude. Very not Gentoo. +100
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On Wed, 08 Aug 2012 22:48:58 +0800 Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote: On 08/08/12 22:35, Jason A. Donenfeld wrote: On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 4:33 PM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote: You are right. In case users really intend to use that, they may be better using app-portage/install-mask, and: $ install-mask -a systemd which will add just the right path. Still misses the point. USE flags were invented to deal with these options. On a default install, which uses OpenRC, users shouldn't have to then emerge an additional program to add more configuration in order to have a clean system. And while we're at it - can we *please* use the openrc useflag to have correct paths and binary names again? Just because upstream says we should be fedora doesn't mean we have to do it. Right now it's really frustrating to have systemd artifacts all over my system even when I explicitly ask for it to not be near it. Very rude. Very not Gentoo. Yes, and please remove all the occurrences of 'GNU' because I don't like it. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote: can we *please* use the openrc useflag to have correct paths and binary names again? Just because upstream says we should be fedora doesn't mean we have to do it. I think that having binaries going in different places based on a USE flag is going to lead to a big mess - especially if we're talking about system packages. If we want to argue about where we put something by all means hash it out or escalate to council. If we want to debate whether to install compatibility symlinks I think that is also more reasonable. However, I don't want the path to bash or glibc or whatever to depend on whether a particular package maintainer believes in the /usr move or even moreso whether some USE flag is set. Rich
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On Wed, 8 Aug 2012 11:03:25 -0400 Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote: On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote: can we *please* use the openrc useflag to have correct paths and binary names again? Just because upstream says we should be fedora doesn't mean we have to do it. I think that having binaries going in different places based on a USE flag is going to lead to a big mess - especially if we're talking about system packages. If we want to argue about where we put something by all means hash it out or escalate to council. If we want to debate whether to install compatibility symlinks I think that is also more reasonable. However, I don't want the path to bash or glibc or whatever to depend on whether a particular package maintainer believes in the /usr move or even moreso whether some USE flag is set. Path to bash can't change because it will break most of scripts in the world. Path to libc can't change because it will break all of the executables in the world. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On Wed, 8 Aug 2012 16:48:20 +0200 Jason A. Donenfeld ja...@zx2c4.com wrote: On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 4:45 PM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote: Not everyone uses bash. Not everyone cares at all about bash-completion. What is your point? I'm not saying I agree with the removal of bash-completion flag (that discussion is for elsewhere), but just that your analogy doesn't hold. zx2c4@Dell /usr/lib/systemd $ equery d bash|grep portage sys-apps/portage-2.2.0_alpha120 As you may or may not know, portage does not use bash completion. Bash completion is a strictly interactive-shell feature. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 11:14 AM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote: On Wed, 8 Aug 2012 16:48:20 +0200 Jason A. Donenfeld ja...@zx2c4.com wrote: On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 4:45 PM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote: Not everyone uses bash. Not everyone cares at all about bash-completion. What is your point? I'm not saying I agree with the removal of bash-completion flag (that discussion is for elsewhere), but just that your analogy doesn't hold. zx2c4@Dell /usr/lib/systemd $ equery d bash|grep portage sys-apps/portage-2.2.0_alpha120 As you may or may not know, portage does not use bash completion. Bash completion is a strictly interactive-shell feature. Pretty sure he was responding to your statement 'not everybody uses bash', not to your statement about bash completion. -- :wq
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 11:13 AM, Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote: Path to bash can't change because it will break most of scripts in the world. Path to libc can't change because it will break all of the executables in the world. My point was illustrative. Basically if we're going to move something, then MOVE it, and don't make that conditional on some flag (unless you're talking about something more nuanced like library location on a multilib system, which is also to be carefully planned). You can say that something belongs in A, and I might say it belongs in B, but I think we should all agree that it should only be in one place or the other, perhaps with compatibility symlinks where necessary (and the symlink behavior might be more conditional whether via USE or eselect or whatever). I don't want a USE=traditional/openrc/gentoo/my-preference flag that randomly breaks things when it is or isn't present - depending on whether various package maintainers worship at one altar or another. Rich
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On Wed, 8 Aug 2012 17:13:26 +0200 Michał Górny mgo...@gentoo.org wrote: On Wed, 8 Aug 2012 11:03:25 -0400 Rich Freeman ri...@gentoo.org wrote: On Wed, Aug 8, 2012 at 10:48 AM, Patrick Lauer patr...@gentoo.org wrote: can we *please* use the openrc useflag to have correct paths and binary names again? Just because upstream says we should be fedora doesn't mean we have to do it. I think that having binaries going in different places based on a USE flag is going to lead to a big mess - especially if we're talking about system packages. If we want to argue about where we put something by all means hash it out or escalate to council. If we want to debate whether to install compatibility symlinks I think that is also more reasonable. However, I don't want the path to bash or glibc or whatever to depend on whether a particular package maintainer believes in the /usr move or even moreso whether some USE flag is set. Path to bash can't change because it will break most of scripts in the world. Path to libc can't change because it will break all of the executables in the world. Ah, sorry. Let me clarify: path to ld.so. -- Best regards, Michał Górny signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 10:37:42AM -0400, Richard Yao wrote: That doesn't work anymore - improvement in udev-186: equery f udev | grep udevd /usr/lib/systemd/systemd-udevd And as long as our maintainers refuse to use the proper paths this is just one of the little things that makes life more exciting for us. Can we please add some sanity back? I second this suggestion. Folks, I am going to point out a couple of things. First, using /usr/lib/dirname/* for binaries does not break any linux or unix standards. There are many packages that do this. Some use libexec, but this is being changed to lib as I understand it. Second, upstream renaming a binary doesn't constitute breaking any standards. There is no rule or law that says, for example, that upstream udev must call their daemon udevd. What if they decide to change it to device-manager-daemon-for-linux? They can do exactly this if they want, and it is up to us, the packagers, to make sure that things don't break for our distributions. Third, putting daemons outside the path doesn't break any standards. Udev isn't the only package doing this. I believe, postfix, for one, doesn't install its daemons in a directory on the path, but I don't see anyone complaining about this. I don't see anything wrong with moving a deamon out of the path, because afaik in day-to-day operations, you don't run a daemon directly from the command line. it is started or stopped by your init system. So, I ask again. You keep complaining about insanity. What's the insanity and why should we go to all of the extra effort you want us to go to to avoid it? William pgpl3X9bOIppi.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On Wed, Aug 08, 2012 at 04:43:33PM +0200, Micha?? G??rny wrote On Wed, 8 Aug 2012 16:35:22 +0200 Jason A. Donenfeld ja...@zx2c4.com wrote: Still misses the point. USE flags were invented to deal with these options. On a default install, which uses OpenRC, users shouldn't have to then emerge an additional program to add more configuration in order to have a clean system. No, they weren't. This looks very similar in principle to USE=-docs. -- Walter Dnes waltd...@waltdnes.org
Re: [gentoo-dev] Global Systemd USE Flag
On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 12:19 AM, William Hubbs willi...@gentoo.org wrote: So, I ask again. You keep complaining about insanity. What's the insanity and why should we go to all of the extra effort you want us to go to to avoid it? I think it's more of a knee-jerk reaction to this: Redhat is pushing systemd very hard, and its technical merits have gained a lot of sway in many places. As such, it seems like lots of everything are joining a fast-paced systemd stampede. Seeing that udevd has been renamed to something with systemd in the name raises a gut fear oh no, now something as fundamental as udev is becoming systemdified. It's just a matter of time before init.d disappears forever. To the non-systemd'ers, I think the general perception is that without any set of policies to manage the stampede, systemd will eventually take over. Maybe this fear is warranted. Maybe it's silly. I don't know. I am glad, though, that Gentoo is sticking with OpenRC, and I hope that the consequences of that decision are respected by ebuild maintainers.
