| 1 |
On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 08:20:32PM +0200, Pacho Ramos wrote: |
| 2 |
> El mié, 20-04-2011 a las 22:02 +0400, Peter Volkov escribió: |
| 3 |
> > В Срд, 20/04/2011 в 12:24 -0500, William Hubbs пишет: |
| 4 |
> > > The author of the bug feels that the way to fix this is for us to put a |
| 5 |
> > > check in openrc that makes it refuse to run services if it was not used |
| 6 |
> > > in the boot process. |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> > This is good idea to have in any case since I remember my system went |
| 9 |
> > crazy after I've tried to start some service inside chroot. |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> > > This may work; however, I do not feel that it addresses the root cause |
| 12 |
> > > of the bug. I feel that the root cause is packages unconditionally |
| 13 |
> > > installing udev rules which assume everyone uses openrc. |
| 14 |
> > |
| 15 |
> > I'd voted to have both implemented. |
| 16 |
> > |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> I would vote for the first one, I still don't like "openrc" USE flag |
| 19 |
> approach much because: |
| 20 |
> 1. Would need to rebuild some packages when switching between init |
| 21 |
> systems. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
I don't think you can get away from this, no matter how you approach |
| 24 |
it. The other approach I thought of is to include the udev pieces |
| 25 |
directly in openrc and make it possible to build openrc with or without |
| 26 |
udev integration. That will still mean you have to rebuild openrc though |
| 27 |
if you want udev support. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
> 2. I remember (from "logrotate" USE flag case) that using an USE flag |
| 30 |
> for simply installing or not a file is not usually preferred :-/ |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
In the logrotate use flag case, that decision was made because a user |
| 33 |
can use INSTALL_MASK="/etc/logrotate.d" in make.conf to block those |
| 34 |
files. But that argument definitely does not apply here. If the user |
| 35 |
doesn't want this support what should he set INSTALL_MASK to? |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
William |
Archives