Harald Weiner posted on Fri, 29 Sep 2017 04:47:35 +0200 as excerpted: > Duncan posted on 09/29/17 2:08 AM as excerpted: > >> Or are we going to replace rm, and fdisk, and gdisk, and cfdisk, and >> cgdisk, and who knows how many other binaries, with "safe" >> alternatives, >> because some gentooer couldn't be bothered to think for a moment >> whether a command in some instructions they're following is actually >> appropriate to the situation and the environment they're working in? > > Well, I think I understand what you want to say but actually your > argument sounds a little bit strange. > Gentoo is about choice, right? So a Gentoo user has the ability to > choose between OpenRC or SystemD init systems (by the way, many thanks > to the Gentoo developers for making this possible). But some > developer(s) might provide a package with a wrapper tool so that instead > of manual "translation" to your init system, you can just use type $ > service <whatever> start And some users might want to use this package. > So I do not see the problem, as long as nobody forces you to use the > service tool. Actually, it adds a new choice for users: Either they use > the service-tool or they invoke their init system commands as they have > always done.
That's not far from what I said, I don't oppose a separate "service" package, I simply don't see the need. But a want isn't a need, which is where your "choice" argument comes in. =:^) As long as it doesn't get added to @system or become a hard dep (direct or indirect) of something in @system, and preferably doesn't become a hard dep of anything, tho a USE-controlled dep is fine. Because that would turn the choice argument on its head, which is what I'm afraid of. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
