Re: [gentoo-project] Call for agenda items - Council meeting 2014-03-11

[Patrick Lauer]

On Friday 28 February 2014 17:56:06 Samuli Suominen wrote:
> On 28/02/14 17:34, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> > On 02/28/2014 06:15 AM, Patrick Lauer wrote:
> >> On 02/27/2014 09:08 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> >>> Hi everyone,
> >>>
> >>> I'm putting the call out there for any agenda items for the next
> >>> Council
> >>> meeting, which will be held on March 11, 2014 at 1900 UTC.  This is
> >>> short notice but we got off track because of FOSDEM and we're going to
> >>> try to get back on track.
> >>>
> >>> So far, the only item is final ratification of glep 63 [1].
> >>
> >> Since it's still a bit cold I'd like to start a nice fire to warm us up:
> >>
> >> I'd like QA and Council to figure out how much we care about FHS.
> >>
> >> My main complaint is some projects (including e.g. systemd and
> >> apparently now also udev) storing config files in /lib and/or /usr/lib.
> >>
> >>  From FHS' point of view this is totally wrong, config files go to /etc
> >>
> >> Only libraries should be in /lib.
> >> Moving things to /usr/lib adds the extra fun that /usr needs to be
> >> mounted to acces *config files*. This is bad for our collective blood
> >> pressure.
> >>
> >> So I'd like to see config files stored in /etc again. Where they can be
> >> properly tracked and versioned ...
> >>
> >> (iow, storing config files in any other location than /etc is wrong;
> >> storing example configs in e.g. /usr/share is fine too; storing config
> >> in any other place is a valid bug that needs to be fixed)
> >>
> >> For upstreams that insist on splitting configs in "system default" and
> >> "local override" (which is rather nonsensical, but let them have some
> >> fun) I would suggest a subfolder of /etc, maybe /etc/defaults or
> >> /etc/systemdefaults or maybe /etc/lib/etc/usr/static if that's what
> >> makes people happy
> >>
> >>
> >> Enjoy the exothermic oxidation,
> >>
> >> Patrick
> >
> > Speaking as a council member and the next chair: Patrick, how would
> > you pose this as a motion?  As stated, the council should "discuss
> > FHS" but how would you word this as a policy that we can rule on?  I
> > have an idea but would like to hear what you want.
> >
> > Speaking as a gentoo dev: This is one of my objections with systemd
> > and the whole / + /usr merge.  It violates a standard which is assumed
> > in many setups, namely FHS.  Another is that systemd violates the "one
> > thing well" principle.
>
> That isn't true; systemd has dozens of sep. executables and each of them
> do one'ish task, and do it well. The one running in PID 1 has very
> little to do with them.

Bad troll is bad - half the bits rely on PID1, e.g. logind is basically a 
convoluted dbus proxy into PID1.

If you can show logind or journald running with sysvinit as PID1 your argument 
has a chance ...