FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Gentoo > Gentoo Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 08-09-2012, 07:51 PM
Rich Freeman
 
Default Questions about SystemD and OpenRC

On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 2:41 PM, Olivier Crête <tester@gentoo.org> wrote:
> He has a perfectly reasonable argument that build time is really not
> something you should be optimising for. Build systems easily become
> overcomplicated if you try to make everyone happy, you do have to make
> choices. Anyway, I'm not sure how that's related to the quality or
> design of systemd.

Well, much as I don't like it, build systems not being adequate for
Gentoo is not exactly a new thing. I maintain a package that embeds
its version in the about/etc boxes by pulling data out of git, which
doesn't exactly work well when I try to install it from a tarball (and
their branch for building outside of git has a bug and dies). Oddly
enough upstream combines this without tagging releases. So, I patch
it, and fork it to github where I can tag my branches and prep
tarballs. And I occasionally pester upstream to accept my patches.
But, such things are not that unusual.

Rich
 
Old 08-09-2012, 07:54 PM
Rich Freeman
 
Default Questions about SystemD and OpenRC

On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 2:44 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés <caneko@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Luca Barbato <lu_zero@gentoo.org> wrote:
> [snip]
>> Repeat after me: having your first process require anything more than
>> libc is stupid and dangerous.
>
> No, it's not. You can (and should) depend on whatever libraries helps
> to achieve the desired goals. If one of the libraries has a bug, guess
> what? It should be fixed.

Look, there is a balance here. This isn't really the thread to
discuss it, but there is a balance between having your only
password-reset UI being the passwd program, and having a 2MB suid root
X11 application like IRIX. Most sane solutions today just have a
non-root front-end, that calls a small well-audited suid app (perhaps
just passwd).

Sure, fixing bugs should be admired, but planning to be robust even in
the face of future unknown bugs is the bedrock of secure software.

Rich
 
Old 08-09-2012, 08:30 PM
Luca Barbato
 
Default Questions about SystemD and OpenRC

On 08/09/2012 09:43 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> On Thu, 09 Aug 2012 10:42:15 +0200
> Luca Barbato <lu_zero@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
>> Repeat after me: having your first process require anything more than
>> libc is stupid and dangerous.
>
> But you are aware that glibc is probably much, much worse than most of
> those 'stupid and dangerous' libraries, right?

Then we have a bigger problem, since everything in our system is based
on that.

>> Once that concept gets accepted then we could discuss about why
>> reinventing shellscript may not be that sound and other less glaring,
>> horrid and appalling design choices.
>
> Yes, exactly. So why does openrc reinvent that horrible shellscript?

It is not re-invented, in fact we can use any compatible shell.

lu
 
Old 08-09-2012, 08:47 PM
Michał Górny
 
Default Questions about SystemD and OpenRC

On Thu, 09 Aug 2012 22:30:02 +0200
Luca Barbato <lu_zero@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On 08/09/2012 09:43 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
> > On Thu, 09 Aug 2012 10:42:15 +0200
> > Luca Barbato <lu_zero@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >
> >> Repeat after me: having your first process require anything more
> >> than libc is stupid and dangerous.
> >
> > But you are aware that glibc is probably much, much worse than most
> > of those 'stupid and dangerous' libraries, right?
>
> Then we have a bigger problem, since everything in our system is based
> on that.

Yes, we do, sir.

> >> Once that concept gets accepted then we could discuss about why
> >> reinventing shellscript may not be that sound and other less
> >> glaring, horrid and appalling design choices.
> >
> > Yes, exactly. So why does openrc reinvent that horrible shellscript?
>
> It is not re-invented, in fact we can use any compatible shell.

Or anything else what can be spawned for shell. And a lot more what you
won't expect. And guess what, people are actually doing crazy things
with it because someone forgot to tell them how a init.d script should
work.

--
Best regards,
Michał Górny
 
Old 08-09-2012, 08:58 PM
Canek Peláez Valdés
 
Default Questions about SystemD and OpenRC

On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 2:47 PM, Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 3:24 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés <caneko@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I agree with Greg Kroah-Hartman: I actually like (and want) a
>> "vertically integrated, tightly coupled way of doing things".
>
> Well, if you completely agreed with him you wouldn't be running Gentoo
> (or Debian, or other general-purpose distros). He advocates that
> ordinary users should use more purpose-driven distros, where all of
> this stuff is less of an issue.
>
> He does make a valid point - I'd never argue that a linux noob should
> start with Gentoo. However, obviously I think Gentoo has its place,
> and the world would be poorer without it.

I don't understand you. Greg is a Gentoo developer; he would never
propose for Gentoo to disappear.

I don't consider myself (nor any other Gentoo user) an ordinary user;
Gentoo is for power users, I believe. That is orthogonal to get a
vertically integrated, tightly coupled system, and the advantages of
it are independent of how easy to use is the system. The primary
advantage (from my point of view) is that we get a unique, robust
stack from kernel to userspace, where we don't need to worry about 20
different implementations of the same functionality.

I think that's what Greg was talking about, and I agree with that.

Regards.
--
Canek Peláez Valdés
Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
 
Old 08-09-2012, 09:14 PM
Rich Freeman
 
Default Questions about SystemD and OpenRC

On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 4:58 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés <caneko@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I don't understand you. Greg is a Gentoo developer; he would never
> propose for Gentoo to disappear.

I wasn't suggesting he was saying it should disappear. I think his
point was that distros like Gentoo shouldn't be the first place people
go. I'm not sure I fully agree with that, but on the other hand I
don't expect us to be having Ubuntu marketshare anytime soon either.
He can of course comment here, but he made his comments publicly on
Google+:

https://plus.google.com/111049168280159033135/posts/V2t57Efkf1s

> I just don't think it can be done well, sorry, which is why I strongly
> recommend tightly-coupled distros for desktops for anyone (like Fedora or
> openSUSE or Ubuntu), and Debian or Gentoo only for servers or embedded systems
> where you know exactly what you are putting together, and why you are doing it
> that way.

Rich
 
Old 08-09-2012, 11:00 PM
"Walter Dnes"
 
Default Questions about SystemD and OpenRC

On Thu, Aug 09, 2012 at 01:44:25PM -0500, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s wrote
> On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Luca Barbato <lu_zero@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> > Obviously it is always fun seeing people first say "accept it or fork
> > it", then "do not keep your fork you are wasting time" once somebody
> > starts forking and/or working for an alternative.
>
> By all means, fork it. Just allow Gentoo users to use udev/systemd as
> upstream intended. And while we are at it, don't put OpenRC in the
> dependency list of baselayout, otherwise it gets pulled in (and
> sysvinit with it) for all systemd users even if we don't use it at
> all.

Good idea. While we're at it, please also let's not make
systemd/udevd/dbus/pam mandatory.

--
Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org>
 
Old 08-09-2012, 11:10 PM
Canek Peláez Valdés
 
Default Questions about SystemD and OpenRC

On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 6:00 PM, Walter Dnes <waltdnes@waltdnes.org> wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 09, 2012 at 01:44:25PM -0500, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s wrote
>> On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Luca Barbato <lu_zero@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>
>> > Obviously it is always fun seeing people first say "accept it or fork
>> > it", then "do not keep your fork you are wasting time" once somebody
>> > starts forking and/or working for an alternative.
>>
>> By all means, fork it. Just allow Gentoo users to use udev/systemd as
>> upstream intended. And while we are at it, don't put OpenRC in the
>> dependency list of baselayout, otherwise it gets pulled in (and
>> sysvinit with it) for all systemd users even if we don't use it at
>> all.
>
> Good idea. While we're at it, please also let's not make
> systemd/udevd/dbus/pam mandatory.

I agree. Systemd is not mandatory; dbus is not mandatory, and thanks
to your efforts udev is not mandatory, right? I don't know about PAM,
but I'm not opposed for it to not being mandatory. So lets stop making
OpenRC mandatory, and besides in a completely artificial way: nothing
really depends on functionalitty provided by OpenRC.

So let people make their OpenRC+mdev systems without systemd, and let
people make their systemd+udev systems without OpenRC. Everybody wins.

Regards.
--
Canek Peláez Valdés
Posgrado en Ciencia e Ingeniería de la Computación
Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
 
Old 08-09-2012, 11:12 PM
Olivier Crête
 
Default Questions about SystemD and OpenRC

On Thu, 2012-08-09 at 19:00 -0400, Walter Dnes wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 09, 2012 at 01:44:25PM -0500, Canek Pel??ez Vald??s wrote
> > On Thu, Aug 9, 2012 at 3:42 AM, Luca Barbato <lu_zero@gentoo.org> wrote:
> >
> > > Obviously it is always fun seeing people first say "accept it or fork
> > > it", then "do not keep your fork you are wasting time" once somebody
> > > starts forking and/or working for an alternative.
> >
> > By all means, fork it. Just allow Gentoo users to use udev/systemd as
> > upstream intended. And while we are at it, don't put OpenRC in the
> > dependency list of baselayout, otherwise it gets pulled in (and
> > sysvinit with it) for all systemd users even if we don't use it at
> > all.
>
> Good idea. While we're at it, please also let's not make
> systemd/udevd/dbus/pam mandatory.

Can we also have a desktop that doesn't use X?


--
Olivier Crête
tester@gentoo.org
Gentoo Developer
 
Old 08-09-2012, 11:26 PM
"G.Wolfe Woodbury"
 
Default Questions about SystemD and OpenRC

On 08/09/2012 07:12 PM, Olivier Crête wrote:
> Can we also have a desktop that doesn't us X?

That is NOT likely to happen. X Windows is about the only *nix
windowing system around.
There may be others, but their use is rare. Practically all the
graphical interface software
uses X and its addons.

--
G.Wolfe Woodbury
redwolfe@gmail.com



Fri Aug 10 02:30:01 2012
Return-Path: <gentoo-dev+bounces-53947-tom=linux-archive.org@lists.gentoo.org>
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on
eagle542.startdedicated.com
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,
SPF_HELO_PASS,SPF_PASS,T_RP_MATCHES_RCVD autolearn=ham version=3.3.2
X-Original-To: tom@linux-archive.org
Delivered-To: tom-linux-archive.org@eagle542.startdedicated.com
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
by eagle542.startdedicated.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3FCA20E0682
for <tom@linux-archive.org>; Fri, 10 Aug 2012 01:30:36 +0200 (CEST)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 73607E07FB;
Thu, 9 Aug 2012 23:30:18 +0000 (UTC)
X-Original-To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Delivered-To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D151E071D
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 23:26:38 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from [192.168.178.29] (e178076157.adsl.alicedsl.de [85.178.76.157])
(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
(Authenticated sender: chithanh)
by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5E5571B4006
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Thu, 9 Aug 2012 23:26:37 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <5024473D.80708@gentoo.org>
Date: Fri, 10 Aug 2012 01:26:53 +0200
From: =?UTF-8?B?Q2jDrS1UaGFuaCBDaHJpc3RvcGhlciBOZ3V54buFbg==?=
<chithanh@gentoo.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:14.0) Gecko/20120729 Firefox/14.0.1 SeaMonkey/2.11
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Questions about SystemD and OpenRC
References: <CACR_K2tKrkCBmsbBXen-Fqx3JYjpWq-qYGCHxEv6C4B9zh1t2Q@mail.gmail.com> <1344366029.24762.31.camel@TesterTop4> <502377E7.8010803@gentoo.org> <CADPrc80QVLCyhBsz=PMpupSfUXG_QfUCJzXS=HtizgV2wS-ihg@mail.gmail.com> <20120809230025.GB7121@waltdnes.org> <1344553969.2121.10.camel@TesterTop4>
In-Reply-To: <1344553969.2121.10.camel@TesterTop4>
X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5a1pre
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit

Olivier Crête schrieb:
> Can we also have a desktop that doesn't use X?

Yes, through Wayland or DirectFB.


Best regards,
ChÃ*-Thanh Christopher Nguyá»…n
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 07:13 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright ©2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org