1 |
On Thu, 2007-02-08 at 13:23 -0700, Daniel Robbins wrote: |
2 |
> I sort of missed this conversation, so apologies in advance if this |
3 |
> has already been covered, but wanted to say that gentoo's initscripts |
4 |
> are generally not suited for embedded systems. |
5 |
> |
6 |
> So making baselayout busybox-compatible doesn't seem to be worth the |
7 |
> disruption and headaches it would cause. |
8 |
|
9 |
Please read over what's been talked about elsewhere in this thread. He |
10 |
is not trying to break existing functionality at all. Only extend it to |
11 |
be posix aware (additionally) |
12 |
|
13 |
> It would be disruptive for |
14 |
> gentoo developers who would need to be extra-careful in maintaining |
15 |
> their initscripts to ensure busybox compatibility. Not to mention the |
16 |
> potential disruption for users. |
17 |
|
18 |
There is no reason this has to be disruptive to the users who don't care |
19 |
about this functionality. |
20 |
|
21 |
> If you are building an embedded system using busybox, then generally |
22 |
> you will want a single /etc/init.d/rcS script that starts all the |
23 |
> stuff you need. |
24 |
|
25 |
As somebody that's had to hand write many of those kinds of scripts. A |
26 |
single rcS is not very ideal. Our init scripts are in fact mostly usable |
27 |
by busybox. Granted there are a few special special cases, but then Roy |
28 |
is offering to update those for free. One of the larger problems really |
29 |
boils down to many packages provide default init.d scripts and these |
30 |
expect the existing baselayout only. That will be a bigger feat to deal |
31 |
with later on down the road. |
32 |
|
33 |
> -Daniel |
34 |
> |
35 |
> On 2/8/07, Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o> wrote: |
36 |
> > On Thursday 08 February 2007, Roy Marples wrote: |
37 |
> > > Mike Frysinger <vapier@g.o> wrote: |
38 |
> > > > On Wednesday 07 February 2007, Roy Marples wrote: |
39 |
> > > > > In the current code I'm running it's only the network stuff that |
40 |
> > > > > uses arrays. If you're thinking about /sbin/functions.sh, well that |
41 |
> > > > > can stay as bash as it's not used by baselayout anymore. |
42 |
> > > > |
43 |
> > > > some init.d scripts use arrays as well |
44 |
> > > |
45 |
> > > Do we know which ones? |
46 |
> > |
47 |
> > grep for it :p |
48 |
> > netmount for sure right now |
49 |
> > |
50 |
> > > The actual scripts themselves can be re-worked if they need to be - |
51 |
> > > this problem only when the arrays are used in config files. |
52 |
> > |
53 |
> > i guess my point was i think we really need to be consistent here ... either |
54 |
> > arrays are OK for init.d scripts or they're not OK |
55 |
> > |
56 |
> > did you get a chance to see how hard it would be to integrate the bash array |
57 |
> > code ? |
58 |
> > -mike |
59 |
> > |
60 |
> > |
61 |
-- |
62 |
Ned Ludd <solar@g.o> |
63 |
Gentoo Linux |
64 |
|
65 |
-- |
66 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |