Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Florian Philipp <lists@×××××××××××.net>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What happened to OpenRC 0.9.6?
Date: Mon, 28 Nov 2011 20:01:25
Message-Id: 4ED3E7B5.8090403@binarywings.net
In Reply to: [gentoo-user] Re: What happened to OpenRC 0.9.6? by Nikos Chantziaras
1 Am 28.11.2011 20:16, schrieb Nikos Chantziaras:
2 > On 11/28/2011 06:59 PM, Florian Philipp wrote:
3 >> Am 28.11.2011 17:15, schrieb Nikos Chantziaras:
4 >>> On 11/28/2011 02:29 PM, Albert W. Hopkins wrote:
5 >>>> On Sun, 2011-11-27 at 20:28 +0100, Andrea Conti wrote:
6 >>>>> With 100% repeatability, mind you, which does raise same questions on
7 >>>>> the amount of testing done before release. Yes, it's ~arch and
8 >>>>> rc_parallel is explicitly marked "experimental", but it's not expected
9 >>>>> to be completely and consistently broken, either.
10 >>>>>
11 >>>>> If that sounds like I'm ranting, it's because I just spent about an
12 >>>>> hour
13 >>>>> getting three machines affected by this problem back into working
14 >>>>> state.
15 >>>>>
16 >>>>> If anyone still has it installed, it's time to sync and downgrade :)
17 >>>>
18 >>>> Sorry to add more to the whining but...
19 >>>>
20 >>>> Yes, you are in the testing tree. Yes, as a member of testing, *you*
21 >>>> expect things will occasionally break, and it is *your* job to test
22 >>>> things, break them, and report bugs.
23 >>>
24 >>> Generally true, but not when something is obviously broken. That means
25 >>> not even its upstream dev bothered to test it.
26 >>>
27 >>> ~arch is for "we think this works, but please give it a go in case there
28 >>> are problems". It's *not* for "we have no idea if this works because we
29 >>> didn't even try it once".
30 >>
31 >> Do you have any idea how much time you can spend with the kind of system
32 >> testing you propose?
33 >
34 > About 2 minutes? Enabling the parallel startup thingy and rebooting the
35 > machine. There you go :-/
36 >
37 >
38
39 Oh, you just want to test the features *you* use, understood. What about
40 *my* (imaginary) issue with rc_depend_strict="YES" or one of the other
41 two dozen parameters you can set there. Not even considering different
42 init scripts in different run levels and so forth. I, for example, start
43 dmcrypt _before_ lvm because all lvm volumes are on one encrypted
44 partition. Do you want that to be tested as well or is your experimental
45 feature more valuable than mine?
46
47 And that's only the tip of the iceberg. What about all the other scripts
48 and config files which belong to baselayout2? What about all other
49 packages? If the openrc dev has to test his configs, surely the SSH dev
50 also has to because a crashing ssh daemon leaves everyone with a
51 headless server in quite a uncomfortable situation.
52
53 Let's make a simple example, shall we? Let's say we only want to test
54 all yes/no variables in rc.conf. There are 7 of them. We also remove
55 those two only affecting output and you still have 5. That are 2^5=32
56 combinations that you consider valid and therefore want to be tested.
57 Now we have a dev spending one hour doing nothing but reboots. Even
58 changing each variable (I counted 27 in total) only once takes a lot of
59 time and also different hardware capabilities (like a second network
60 interface).
61
62 Sorry if that sounded harsh but really, what you want is what Redhat
63 (maybe) does for its releases and those only occur every few years and
64 cost lots of money.
65
66 Regards,
67 Florian Philipp

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What happened to OpenRC 0.9.6? "Albert W. Hopkins" <marduk@×××××××××××.org>
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: What happened to OpenRC 0.9.6? Andrea Conti <alyf@××××.net>