1 |
On Thu, May 09, 2013 at 12:21:53AM +0800, Ben de Groot wrote: |
2 |
> On 8 May 2013 23:49, Fabio Erculiani <lxnay@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
> > On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 5:39 PM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn |
4 |
> > <chithanh@g.o> wrote: |
5 |
> >> Ben de Groot schrieb: |
6 |
> >>> On 1 May 2013 18:04, Fabio Erculiani <lxnay@g.o> wrote: |
7 |
> >>>> It looks like there is some consensus on the effort of making systemd |
8 |
> >>>> more accessible, while there are problems with submitting bugs about |
9 |
> >>>> new systemd units of the sort that maintainers just_dont_answer(tm). |
10 |
> >>>> In this case, I am just giving 3 weeks grace period for maintainers to |
11 |
> >>>> answer and then I usually go ahead adding units (I'm in systemd@ after |
12 |
> >>>> all). |
13 |
> >>> In my opinion you should not be asking maintainers to add systemd |
14 |
> >>> units to their packages. They most likely do not have systems on which |
15 |
> >>> they can test these, and very few users would need them anyway. I |
16 |
> >>> would think it is better to add them to a separate systemd-units |
17 |
> >>> package. |
18 |
> >> |
19 |
> >> Note that a similar thing is already done with the selinux policy packages. |
20 |
> > |
21 |
> > Upstreams will _DO_ ship systemd units at some point in future. It's a |
22 |
> > completely different thing. Don't compare oranges to apples. |
23 |
> |
24 |
> Where upstreams ship systemd units, I don't think there is any issue. |
25 |
> The problem is you are asking Gentoo maintainers to add unit files |
26 |
> that upstream is not shipping. In this case we should test and |
27 |
> maintain these ourselves, which is an additional burden for very |
28 |
> little (if any) gain. |
29 |
> |
30 |
> >> |
31 |
> >> Mostly the complaints against adding systemd units are that it would |
32 |
> >> unnecessarily clutter non-systemd installs. Users who complain are told |
33 |
> >> to set INSTALL_MASK but that is somewhat unwieldy. |
34 |
> > |
35 |
> > Cluttering a system by just installing 4kb files? The council has |
36 |
> > spoken. If you don't like the decision, I am sorry. |
37 |
> > I can say the same for init scripts, they are freaking cluttering my |
38 |
> > system and they're all over. |
39 |
> > Or perhaps all these man pages, I don't need man pages locally but |
40 |
> > still most ebuilds do install them. What do we do? |
41 |
> > |
42 |
> > Let's be serious here. |
43 |
> |
44 |
> You are forgetting that OpenRC is, and will remain for the foreseeable |
45 |
> future, the default on Gentoo. Any systemd related files are |
46 |
> completely useless for most of our users. And those of us who consider |
47 |
> systemd a cancer do not want to see such files installed at all. |
48 |
|
49 |
As was said above, the distro policy is that we always install |
50 |
configuration files. This is how we handle logrotate and xinetd among |
51 |
other things. |
52 |
|
53 |
I would like to see the logrotate, xinet and systemd use flags used for |
54 |
this, but to get that to happen we need to change the policy -- you do |
55 |
that by putting this on the agenda for the council. |
56 |
|
57 |
If we do this, I would rather change it across the board and not just |
58 |
for systemd. So, this would mean adding an openrc use flag to every |
59 |
ebuild that installs openrc init scripts and using it to control that as |
60 |
well. |
61 |
|
62 |
> Gentoo is about choice and configurability. This means we will |
63 |
> accommodate both sides: so those who want to use an alternative init |
64 |
> system can do so, and those who want to avoid it can also keep doing |
65 |
> so. |
66 |
|
67 |
The argument in the past has been that we aren't taking away the choice |
68 |
and configurability since we have INSTALL_MASK. |
69 |
|
70 |
> >> |
71 |
> >> A separate package for the unit file would solve this problem nicely. |
72 |
> > |
73 |
> > No, it will generate a gazillion of other problems. Like conflicts |
74 |
> > arising every single day, just to name one. |
75 |
> |
76 |
> I think you are making the problem bigger than it is. Are there really |
77 |
> that many packages that need a unit file, but upstream doesn't ship |
78 |
> them yet, and many that are in the process of changing that? Either |
79 |
> way, it should be an easy fix for systemd enthusiasts. |
80 |
|
81 |
Having separate packages for systemd units that we ship would be pretty |
82 |
unwieldy. I can see advantages to it, but I can definitely also see |
83 |
disadvantages. This same thinking could apply to OpenRC init scripts as |
84 |
well. |
85 |
|
86 |
William |