Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: "Canek Peláez Valdés" <caneko@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation
Date: Tue, 30 Jul 2013 22:41:02
Message-Id: CADPrc80xhLjnAhpdpP-5DiNeC1QdjpfG-Dgqx+K9s2dgP9BTfQ@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation by covici@ccs.covici.com
1 There is going to be resistance. Two months ago there was a huge
2 thread in gentoo-dev, because a package maintaner complained that his
3 co-maintainer added a systemd unit to the package:
4
5 http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/85792
6
7 In the end, the maintainer rage-quit:
8
9 http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.project/2551
10
11 However, this is the extreme behaviour: most developers (and rational
12 people) agree to adding systemd unit files to all packages, and we
13 have much better coverage now that some months ago.
14
15 If users cooperate opening bugs adding systemd unit files (after
16 testing them in their machines), the coverage is going to grow even
17 faster.
18
19 Regards.
20
21 On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 5:04 PM, <covici@××××××××××.com> wrote:
22 > Canek Peláez Valdés <caneko@×××××.com> wrote:
23 >
24 >> On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 12:53 PM, <covici@××××××××××.com> wrote:
25 >> > Canek Peláez Valdés <caneko@×××××.com> wrote:
26 >> >
27 >> >> On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 2:47 AM, Pavel Volkov <negaipub@×××××.com> wrote:
28 >> >> > On Tue, Jul 30, 2013 at 11:09 AM, Pavel Volkov <negaipub@×××××.com> wrote:
29 >> >> >>
30 >> >> >> On Sunday 28 July 2013 03:22:02 Canek Peláez Valdés wrote:
31 >> >> >> > Therefore, as of today, anyone can have a Gentoo machine with only
32 >> >> >> > systemd, with no OpenRC installed.
33 >> >> >>
34 >> >> >> Really? Bug 373219 is still open.
35 >> >> >
36 >> >> >
37 >> >> > Sorry, I missed your explanation at the end about that one. Ok, thanks for
38 >> >> > what you've done :)
39 >> >>
40 >> >> Mmmh, and I missed this last reply of you.
41 >> >>
42 >> >> Anyway, dealing with /etc/init.d/functions.sh is basically trivial.
43 >> >
44 >> > But still, we have lots of packages with no systemd units -- shouldn't
45 >> > they all have a systemd use flag and units to go with it -- basically
46 >> > anything which has something in /etc/init.d . I was looking for a
47 >> > sendmail unit and could find nothing, for one example.
48 >>
49 >> Yeah, we are not even near 100% coverage. However, one of the many
50 >> advantages of systemd is that a service unit from a distribution
51 >> usually works as-is or with minimal changes in any other.
52 >>
53 >> For many basic unit files, you can go to
54 >>
55 >> https://github.com/vonSchlotzkow/systemd-gentoo-units
56 >>
57 >> It has a unit file for postfix, for example. If the one you are
58 >> looking for is not there, you can search in other distributions. If
59 >> you download the RPM from
60 >> http://rpm.pbone.net/index.php3/stat/4/idpl/21317874/dir/fedora_19/com/sendmail-8.14.7-1.fc19.i686.rpm.html,
61 >> and extract the files with rpm2tarbz2, then you can get the
62 >> sendmail.service file.
63 >>
64 >> It will probably need some changes to work with Gentoo, but it should
65 >> not be difficult.
66 >>
67 >> When is working, you can send your unit to the package maintainer in
68 >> Gentoo, and at some point it could be included in the package (like
69 >> the OpenRC init script).
70 >>
71 >> That's how we will get 100% coverage, eventually.
72 >
73 > OK, I will check those -- thanks. I hope package maintainers now start
74 > putting those service units in, now that systemd is required by gnome.
75 >
76 >
77 > --
78 > Your life is like a penny. You're going to lose it. The question is:
79 > How do
80 > you spend it?
81 >
82 > John Covici
83 > covici@××××××××××.com
84 >
85
86
87
88 --
89 Canek Peláez Valdés
90 Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación
91 Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation Daniel Campbell <lists@××××××××.us>
Re: [gentoo-user] gentoo-systemd-only deprecation Tanstaafl <tanstaafl@×××××××××××.org>