Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: Questions about SystemD and OpenRC
Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2012 18:23:14
Message-Id: pan.2012.08.15.18.21.15@cox.net
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Questions about SystemD and OpenRC by Rich Freeman
1 Rich Freeman posted on Wed, 15 Aug 2012 06:27:41 -0400 as excerpted:
2
3 > Right now having decent KDE and Gnome support with all the bells and
4 > whistles[...] isn't that hard, [It] will likely get harder, which means
5 > in practice what we'll probably have is a reasonable compromise which
6 > will never be quite as polished in any one direction as it could be,
7 > unless the end user does the polishing.
8
9 Well stated.
10
11 > RE you concerns about OpenRC being in @system. Personally I'm a fan of
12 > getting rid of @system entirely except as something used to build
13 > install CDs or having some sets for convenience in building systems. It
14 > only exists for a few reasons that I can think of:
15 > 1. Devs don't want to have ebuilds that capture dependencies on every
16 > little thing. A few well-chosen virtuals like "shell utilities" or
17 > whatever might help with this.
18 > 2. Things like Prefix rely on the system not installing local copies of
19 > libraries in the core system it needs to link to. Careful use of
20 > package.provided in profiles might address this.
21 > 3. We'd need many more virtuals to handle situations like FreeBSD where
22 > people don't what GNU on their systems. Right now if they are system
23 > packages they just define system appropriately and ebuilds don't
24 > directly pull in the GNU stuff anyway.
25
26 AFAIK, @system also helps resolve a few nasty circular dependencies. In
27 fact, I believe that's it's primary purpose. As such I'm not sure it's
28 practical (as opposed to possible, cost/benefit simply makes it
29 impractical) to entirely get rid of, but it does occur to me that sets
30 would be an interesting way to go. Define a few sets that together
31 compose @system as we have it today, and basically package.provide them
32 during the bootstrap phase.
33
34 AFAIK the original stage tarball also contains a minimal installed tree,
35 for similar reasons. I'm not actually sure how they interact. That'd be
36 releng/arch/catalyst territory.
37
38 --
39 Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs.
40 "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
41 and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Questions about SystemD and OpenRC Michael Mol <mikemol@×××××.com>