[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       gentoo-dev
Subject:    Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: oldnet scripts splitting out from OpenRC
From:       William Hubbs <williamh () gentoo ! org>
Date:       2013-04-24 17:54:07
Message-ID: 20130424175407.GA2404 () linux1
[Download RAW message or body]


On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 01:34:36PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Wednesday 24 April 2013 13:23:23 William Hubbs wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 12:58:21PM -0400, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> > > On 24/04/13 12:16 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
> > > > it has been suggested that gentoo's oldnet scripts be split out
> > > > into their own package separate from OpenRC so that they can be
> > > > developed independently. I am looking at doing this for OpenRC
> > > > 0.12, which I hope to release soon.
> > > > 
> > > > This means when you emerge or upgrade to openrc-0.12, the net.*
> > > > scripts will no longer be included. I am going to call the separate
> > > > package that includes these scripts gentoo-oldnet.
> > > > 
> > > > My plan is  to write a newsitem when OpenRC 0.12 is released
> > > > telling users this and that they will have to emerge gentoo-oldnet
> > > > to get the gentoo networking scripts or turn on the newnet (maybe
> > > > I'll change this to net) use flag to get OpenRC's network scripts
> > > > installed and put ewarns in the ebuild if this use flag is turned
> > > > off.
> > > > 
> > > > I feel that a newsitem and ewarns in the OpenRC ebuild cover live
> > > > systems well. In a nutshell, users should pay attention to their
> > > > news items and ewarns.
> > > > 
> > > > On the other hand, some are suggesting that I should add a runtime
> > > > dependency to OpenRC so that it pulls in gentoo-oldnet. Since
> > > > OpenRC doesn't need gentoo-oldnet in order to run, I feel like this
> > > > would be abusing dependencies.
> > > > 
> > > > Does anyone have any thoughts?
> > > 
> > > Current users should be able to do a -uDN and still have their
> > > existing systems work as-is.  Whether you do this via a static
> > > dependency or one controlled by a use flag (and be sure use flag
> > > defaults would have oldnet installed by default) is up to you.
> > 
> >  The issue is that OpenRC does not have any kind of dependency on
> >  gentoo-oldnet at all. There will be a separate loopback script in OpenRC
> >  so it is possible to run OpenRC on a system without the oldnet or
> >  newnet scripts. In fact, this is a completely valid configuration.
> > 
> > OpenRC doesn't "link" to gentoo-oldnet in any way, so there is no
> > dependency.
> > 
> > The way I read the dev manual [1], a newsitem and postinst messages are
> > the way to go for somethinglike this.
> 
> it is reasonable to expect openrc updates to *not* break a system.  that means 
> people shouldn't be required to read a news/postinst message to keep from 
> killing things.
> 
> even then, a default Gentoo system should have networking support available by 
> default.  our manuals assume this, and people shouldn't have to install a 
> stage3 and then do `emerge gentoo-oldnet` just to have that happen.  so 
> keeping a dependency in openrc (perhaps initially hard, or behind 
> IUSE=+oldnet) makes sense.

I was planning on opening a bug before all of this hit stable to have
releng add gentoo-oldnet to the stages when it does hit stable.

if we keep a dependency for a while, even behind something like
IUSE="+oldnet", when we drop it, people will still be hit if they do
emerge --depclean before they emerge gentoo-oldnet.

Also, (although I don't really care about this much because we tell people
not to do it), folks who set USE="-* foo bar bas" in their make.conf would
get hit immediately with this solution.

Am I missing something? It just seems like this is putting off the
emerge command people will need to run for a while.

William


["signature.asc" (application/pgp-signature)]

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]