Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Patrick Lauer <patrick@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: renaming "rc" binary in OpenRC
Date: Thu, 12 Dec 2013 00:39:03
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: renaming "rc" binary in OpenRC by Rich Freeman
1 On 12/12/2013 05:28 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
2 > On Wed, Dec 11, 2013 at 3:47 PM, Chris Reffett <creffett@g.o> wrote:
3 >> The idea of running a sed on inittab in an ebuild, no matter what the
4 >> context, terrifies me. Perhaps we can ease this in slowly by renaming rc ->
5 >> openrc and symlinking rc -> openrc and making a release with that change
6 >> concurrent with a news item? Or even just do that in the ebuild rather than
7 >> in the actual sources. I don't think Debian will keel over and die if it
8 >> takes a little extra time for the change to go through, and it beats a ton
9 >> of broken systems.
10 >
11 > ++
12 >
13 > No reason the symlink couldn't be done in the ebuild either - which
14 > keeps the package itself clean. There could be news to clean up
15 > inittab and such, and then perhaps down the road the compat symlink
16 > could be removed.
17 >
18 > Nice to see interest in Debian (granted, I know there was interest
19 > quite a while back). Having more and better options is just good for
20 > everybody - I'd like to see OpenRC become the best traditional-style
21 > service manager around (though honestly I'd be hard-pressed to think
22 > of any that are quite as good already).
23 >
24 > I think one thing that would be nice to dream about someday would be a
25 > systemd-compatibility init.d script. That would be symlinked to a
26 > service name just like a typical network interface script, and would
27 > look for a unit file and interpret it (perhaps just taking a path from
28 > conf.d). I'd think it wouldn't be hard to do, setting aside the more
29 > active-management features of systemd.
30 >
32 Well, given that systemd unit files don't express dependencies ...
34 I've thought about it and can't figure out a way to make mixed-mode work
35 sanely, at all. You'd have to either manually order the startup
36 sequence, or annotate the unit files with dependency info.
38 Plus you'd need some machinery like socket-activation proxies or you're
39 throwing away even more (to the point where the unit file is just a way
40 to run an executable)
42 I don't think this can be done in a way that adds value to users.


Subject Author
[gentoo-dev] Re: rfc: renaming "rc" binary in OpenRC Martin Vaeth <vaeth@××××××××××××××××××××××××.de>
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: renaming "rc" binary in OpenRC Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o>