On 05/20/2013 11:34 PM, Canek Peláez Valdés wrote: > On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 3:03 AM, Daniel Campbell <dlcampb...@gmx.com> > wrote:
[snip] >> That's missing the point. If you don't run systemd, having unit >> files is pointless. Thankfully there's INSTALL_MASK and whatnot, >> but that seems like a hack instead of something more robust. Why >> include systemd unit files (by default, with no systemd USE flag, >> thanks to the council...) on a system that's not using it? 154 >> files isn't negligible unless you're flippant with your system and >> don't care about bloat. Unused software sitting around *is* a >> waste of disk-space. > > Unit files are not software; they are data. That's like saying "shell scripts are not software, they are data". Unit files, semantically and collectively, are a system-behavior-defining set of interpreted modules written in a declarative language. In fact, that's what makes them even remotely appealing, on comparison to shell-based init scripts; they make declarations of requirements, the "what", and leave it to the system resolver to work out the "how". (It's from this perspective that I like the idea of using unit files as a point of origin for *generating* init configurations like systemv, openrc or runit scripts. You'd be compiling the init script for the target init system, and your result should be more robust for it.) > > And I believe you are the one missing the point. I don't run OpenRC; > I don't need no files in /etc/init.d. But you don't see me (nor any > other systemd user) complaining about pointless scripts in > /etc/init.d. I just put /etc/init.d in INSTALL_MASK and go on with > my life. > > Non-systemd users should do the same for files under > /usr/lib/systemd, if they really are that worried about systemd > "infecting" their systems. Complaining about a council-decided policy > (and, I believe, backed up by the developers that matter, including > the OpenRC maintainers) is just beating on a dead horse. The push to keep USE flags specific to enabling and disabling program features seems weird to me; the semantics of USE flags seem valuable for a great deal more than that. > > Get over it. > >> Some people (like myself) came to Gentoo to avoid putting systemd >> on their systems and to make use of the great choice that Gentoo >> allows. This push to make systemd a "first level citizen" or >> whatever reeks of marketing. > > If Gentoo is about choice, then systemd is one of those choices. This I take no issue with. > And systemd will become a first class citizen inside Gentoo, like it > or not. ... > Support for it has been getting better and better, and more and more > Gentoo users are running with systemd. And users are switching to eudev and mdev as well. Personally, I think heterogeneity is a good thing...That's a huge part of why I like Gentoo; it's a crucible for open-source software that tends to bring breakages in edge-case (but theoretically "supported") configurations to upstream attention. > > If some fundamentalists ... > users don't want even one file in their systems with "systemd" on > their paths, they can install eudev/mdev, put the necessary > directories in INSTALL_MASK, and do the extra work. If some other > fundamentalists users (like myself) don't want even one OpenRC > related file on our systems, we can create an overlay to remove the > dependency of baselayout on OpenRC, put /etc/init.d in INSTALL_MASK, > and do the extra work. > > Neither case covers the average systemd/OpenRC user, who doesn't > care about a few scattered files in /etc/init.d nor /usr/lib/systemd, > and just want to run her machine with the init system of her choice. > If Gentoo is really about choice. It is, and it should be. > >> If there is desire among users for unit files, they can contact >> upstream or maintain their own set of unit files. It's not like >> they're hard to write. > > So, Gentoo is about choice, but only for the choices you agree with. > Great. Nobody says the devs must do whatever the users demand of them; the devs are unpaid. The best arguments in this thread, to my eye, have been to encourage devs to accept user-contributed unit files. As users, you and I can't force devs to do anything. But we can always pull up our sleeves and dig in ourselves.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
