Re: [gentoo-dev] Including a warning to restart daemons after an update.

2011-08-22 Thread Patrick Lauer
On 08/21/11 13:29, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
 Hi everyone,
 
 After updating libraries, I always run something like
 
 lsof -x / | grep DEL
 
 to see if any running binaries are linking to old libraries that were
 just updated and then I manually restart them.  This is particularly
 important if the update addresses some security issue in the library.
 
 Debian and its derivatives take the drastic step of restarting the
 daemons for you, which is, in my opinion, undesirable.  I'd like to be
 in control of when I upgrade and when I restart my daemons.

For some users restarting might be acceptable, I would rather not have
to figure out why the DB just went down and can't restart during an
update :)
And the checks (like preserved-libs) that run after pkg installation can
take so much time that I'd want them to be user-controllable - sometimes
you just don't want to wait 5 minutes after a package merge to regain
control of your shell

So I think there are three cases we need to consider:
1) autorestart. FEATURES-controlled maybe?
2) indicator - warn, but do not take any action
3) completely disabled, don't waste my time
 
 OpenSuse has a nice solution.  After an upgrade, it tells you that there
 are some running binaries still linking against the old libraries and
 asks you to run zypper ps to see them in a pretty format.  You can
 then restart at your discretion.
 
 I'm wondering if we should add something like that?  Something to be run
 post_inst() and just ewarn the user.  It could be a small eclass on its
 own that maintainers can elect to inherit and use in ebuilds for daemons.

eclass sounds hackish since it's portage doing the work. A postinst hook
or a direct portage feature sounds more reasonable to me.

 What do you think?  If its a good idea, is implementing it in an eclass
 the way to go?
Yes, no :)

Have fun,

Patrick





[gentoo-dev] Progress on cvs-git migration

2011-08-22 Thread Alexey Shvetsov

Hi all!

Is there any progress since last update on cvs-git migration?


--
Best Regards,
Alexey 'Alexxy' Shvetsov
Petersburg Nuclear Physics Institute, Russia
Department of Molecular and Radiation Biophysics
Gentoo Team Ru
Gentoo Linux Dev
mailto:alexx...@gmail.com
mailto:ale...@gentoo.org
mailto:ale...@omrb.pnpi.spb.ru



Re: [gentoo-dev] Progress on cvs-git migration

2011-08-22 Thread Robin H. Johnson
On Mon, Aug 22, 2011 at 08:28:29PM +0400, Alexey Shvetsov wrote:
 Is there any progress since last update on cvs-git migration?
The list for it is gentoo-scm, not gentoo-dev.

There's an experimental tree that mirrors CVS:
http://git-exp.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=exp/gentoo-x86.git;a=summary

Unresolved items:
- commit signing
- thin Manifests
- merge policies

In terms of the tree size question, we were going to produce a
zero-history point at the switchover time, and offer a graftable pack
with all prior history. This got the initial packfile down under 80MiB
(with the historical packfile being ~900MiB).

-- 
Robin Hugh Johnson
Gentoo Linux: Developer, Trustee  Infrastructure Lead
E-Mail : robb...@gentoo.org
GnuPG FP   : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED  F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85



[gentoo-dev] Gentoostats, SoC 2011

2011-08-22 Thread Vikraman
Hi all,

Gentoostats[0] is a GSoC 2011 project to collect package statistics from gentoo
machines. Please check it out. Bug reports and feature suggestions are welcome.

To submit your stats, use the app-portage/gentoostats ebuild from betagarden
overlay[1].

[0] https://soc.dev.gentoo.org/gentoostats/
[1] https://soc.dev.gentoo.org/gentoostats/about

-- 
Vikraman


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature