| 1 |
On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 1:28 PM, William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 12:28:43PM -0400, Mike Gilbert wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 11:45 AM, William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote: |
| 4 |
>> > On Fri, Apr 27, 2018 at 12:48:09AM -0700, Zac Medico wrote: |
| 5 |
>> >> On 04/26/2018 11:34 PM, Kent Fredric wrote: |
| 6 |
>> >> > On Thu, 26 Apr 2018 13:35:15 -0700 |
| 7 |
>> >> > Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o> wrote: |
| 8 |
>> >> > |
| 9 |
>> >> >> emerge --depclean, resulting in an unbootable system. Just say-in. |
| 10 |
>> >> > |
| 11 |
>> >> > And depclean being very verbose doesn't do many favours here either. |
| 12 |
>> >> > |
| 13 |
>> >> > ( I regularly do >500 package depcleans and spotting things that aren't meant to be |
| 14 |
>> >> > culled amongst that list is a bit of a challenge )> |
| 15 |
>> >> |
| 16 |
>> >> At least for system packages, it will show a warning like the one shown |
| 17 |
>> >> here: |
| 18 |
>> >> |
| 19 |
>> >> https://bugs.gentoo.org/642484#c0 |
| 20 |
>> >> |
| 21 |
>> >> Hopefully that message helps those that are paying enough attention. |
| 22 |
>> >> What can we do for those that overlook the warning message, other than |
| 23 |
>> >> give them some rescue instructions for making their system boot again? |
| 24 |
>> > |
| 25 |
>> > Another option suggested to me was to add a use flag to OpenRC that |
| 26 |
>> > pulls in a dependency on virtual/init instead of adding virtual/init to |
| 27 |
>> > @system. The suggestion originally was to add it to rdepend, but that |
| 28 |
>> > doesn't feel right to me since openrc really doesn't have a runtime |
| 29 |
>> > dependency on init, so I'm thinking something like this: |
| 30 |
>> > |
| 31 |
>> > IUSE="... +separate-init" |
| 32 |
>> > |
| 33 |
>> > PDEPEND=" |
| 34 |
>> > ... |
| 35 |
>> > separate-init? ( virtual/init )" |
| 36 |
>> > |
| 37 |
>> > Thoughts? |
| 38 |
>> |
| 39 |
>> RDEPEND and PDEPEND have essentially the same meaning when there are |
| 40 |
>> no cycles in the dependency graph. The devmanual suggests that PDEPEND |
| 41 |
>> should only be used to avoid cyclic dependencies. |
| 42 |
>> |
| 43 |
>> I don't see any reason to prefer PDEPEND over RDEPEND here, and I |
| 44 |
>> don't understand why that would "feel" better. It effectively gets |
| 45 |
>> treated as a runtime dependency either way. |
| 46 |
> |
| 47 |
> The goal of this is to find a way to accurately reflect the relationship |
| 48 |
> between openrc and sysvinit in our ebuilds. |
| 49 |
> |
| 50 |
> The relationship between openrc and sysvinit is best described as a |
| 51 |
> configurable reverse runtime dependency which we enable by default -- |
| 52 |
> sysvinit uses openrc to bring up the system, but openrc itself does not |
| 53 |
> have a hard dependency on any init provider. |
| 54 |
> It did in the past, because it called killall5, which is part of |
| 55 |
> sysvinit, but that has been changed. |
| 56 |
> |
| 57 |
> So, the whole relationship is backward in our ebuilds. That, combined |
| 58 |
> with our distro-wide ban on using use flags for optional runtime |
| 59 |
> dependencies (also in the devmanual) is why I suggested this. |
| 60 |
|
| 61 |
I have no objection to the USE flag idea. Just put the dependency in |
| 62 |
RDEPEND, not PDEPEND. There is no depgraph cycle to be avoided here. |
Archives