Re: [gentoo-dev] Upcoming posting restrictions on the gentoo-dev mailing list
On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 5:57 AM, David Seifert wrote: > On Wed, 2018-01-10 at 08:55 +0100, Lars Wendler wrote: >> On Wed, 10 Jan 2018 08:48:56 +0300 Eray Aslan wrote: >>> On Tue, Jan 09, 2018 at 10:20:56PM +0100, Andreas K. Huettel wrote: * Posting to the list will only be possible to Gentoo developers and whitelisted additional participants. >>> >>> This is so contrary to what I and I thought Gentoo stands for: >>> openness, transparency, inclusiveness even when these require a >>> rather thick skin and result in high noise. It's a price worth >>> paying. >>> >>> I guess I should a) pay more attention to council elections b) >>> consider the idea that the whole council thing as it stands now is >>> just not working. >> >> Wow. I couldn't have said it better. Seems we're turning into an >> elitist club or something... I wonder how many users we're going to >> loose on this one. Well done council :-( > > If your only reason to use Gentoo is because you can post to the main > developer ML, and not because we try to provide a great distribution > with lots of choice, a current toolchain and lots of customization, > then you're likely using the wrong distribution. It's a question of perception. Some users might come to feel that the Gentoo developers are not interested in their input, unlike the developers of all other distributions (that I know of). Gentoo's singling itself itself out as less receptive to its users simply because some its developers are too Trumpian to resist arguing with people who criticize their work or Gentoo.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Providing a `service` scripts that speaks OpenRC and systemd
On Sat, Sep 30, 2017 at 12:20 AM, Walter Dnes wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 04:27:31PM -0500, Austin English wrote
>> While having the pleasure of working with some proprietary software
>> recently, I was asked to run `service foo restart`, and was surprised to
>> see:
>> foobar ~ # service foo restart
>> * service: service `foo' does not exist
>
> Ridiculous! We need to develop one universal standard that covers
> everyone's use cases. https://xkcd.com/927/
>
> But if you insist, why not just set up a short bash script called
> "service" rather than monkeying with every init system's internals?
>
> #!/bin/bash
> if [[ ]] ; then
>systemctl ${2} ${1}
> elif [[ ]] ; then
>/etc/init.d/${1} ${2}
> elif [[ ]] ; then
>
> else
>echo "ERROR: Unsupported init system; 'service' call failed"
> fi
With a "[ $# -eq 2 ]" test and with "env -i set_some_envvars
/etc/init.d/${1} ${2}" (and use "rc-service ${1} ${2}" instead of
"/etc/init.d/${1} ${2}")
> This can handle a large number of different inits, with as many "elif"
> lines as you care to add. But, how do we reliably detect the currently
> running init system? Are there running processes, or entries in /sys/
> or /proc/ or /dev that are unique to to each init system?
It's not init that you want to check, it's rc.
For openrc, "[ -d /run/openrc ]" should do the trick.
For systemd, the canonical way is "[ -d /run/systemd/system ]".
Re: [gentoo-dev] Requirements for UID/GID management
On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 1:52 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: > > Just have a table somewhere (wiki?) to track who is using what UID/GID > and encode those defaults into the ebuild that creates those users. FYI, how Debian and Fedora do it: Debian policy https://www.debian.org/doc/debian-policy/ch-opersys.html#s9.2.2 Debian users https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/users/cjwatson/base-passwd.git/plain/passwd.master Debian groups https://anonscm.debian.org/cgit/users/cjwatson/base-passwd.git/plain/group.master Fedora users and groups https://git.fedorahosted.org/cgit/setup.git/plain/uidgid
Re: [gentoo-dev] newsitem: important fstab update
On Wed, Oct 26, 2016 at 12:04 PM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote: > > requirement for udev to "settle" before it's startup completes. The its startup
Re: [gentoo-dev] grub-2 configuration
On Wed, Oct 19, 2016 at 4:43 PM, Joakim Tjernlund
wrote:
> On Wed, 2016-10-19 at 15:21 -0400, Tom H wrote:
>>
>> but it looks like, unlike for grub-legacy, you need a grub config file
>> ("/boot/grub{,2}/grub.cfg") to exist.
>
> That is reasonable, to create a new entry one needs to copy the previous and
> replace the
> kernel.
>
> Would be nice if someone could confirm this though.
if [[ -z "${GRUB_CONF}" ]]; then
print_error 1 "Error! Grub2 configuration file does not exist, please
ensure grub2 is correctly setup first."
return 0
fi
Re: [gentoo-dev] grub-2 configuration
On Tue, Oct 18, 2016 at 1:20 PM, Joakim Tjernlund
wrote:
> On Tue, 2016-10-18 at 12:45 -0400, Tom H wrote:
>> On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 10:54 AM, M. J. Everitt wrote:
>>> On 11/10/16 15:42, Tom H wrote:
>>>>
>>>> You can use exactly the same text in 40_grub that you'd use in
>>>> grub.cfg and have the latter generated.
>>>
>>> That's a useful tit-bit .. thanks!
>>
>> You're welcome.
>>
>> I doubt that the grub developers intended 40_custom to be the only
>> "/etc/grub.d/" file to be executed but it's practical for generating a
>> simple grub.cfg. This is what I use in a Debian VM:
>
> We still use grub-1 and I really like the automatic generation of new
> grub menu entries using genkernel --bootloader=grub, does this work
> with grub2 as well?
It looks ike you can pass "--bootloader=grub2" but it's not documented
in the man page because gen_bootloader.sh has:
set_bootloader() {
case "${BOOTLOADER}" in
grub)
set_bootloader_grub
;;
grub2)
set_bootloader_grub2
;;
*)
print_warning "Bootloader ${BOOTLOADER} is not currently supported"
;;
esac
}
but it looks like, unlike for grub-legacy, you need a grub config file
("/boot/grub{,2}/grub.cfg") to exist.
Re: [gentoo-dev] grub-2 configuration
On Tue, Oct 11, 2016 at 10:54 AM, M. J. Everitt wrote: > On 11/10/16 15:42, Tom H wrote: >> >> You can use exactly the same text in 40_grub that you'd use in >> grub.cfg and have the latter generated. > > That's a useful tit-bit .. thanks! You're welcome. I doubt that the grub developers intended 40_custom to be the only "/etc/grub.d/" file to be executed but it's practical for generating a simple grub.cfg. This is what I use in a Debian VM: #!/bin/sh cat <
Re: [gentoo-dev] grub-2 configuration
On Sun, Oct 9, 2016 at 12:05 PM, William Hubbs wrote: > On Sun, Oct 09, 2016 at 03:45:11AM +0100, M. J. Everitt wrote: >> On 09/10/16 00:57, Ben Kohler wrote: >>> On Sat, Oct 8, 2016 at 9:28 AM, Tom H >> <mailto:tomh0...@gmail.com>> wrote: >>> On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 11:34 PM, William Hubbs >>> mailto:willi...@gentoo.org>> wrote: >>>> >>>> You don't have to use grub-mkconfig. You can write >>> /boot/grub/grub.cfg >>>> by hand if you want, and it appears that the syntax is documented in >>>> the grub info pages. >>> >>> If you write "/boot/grub/grub.cfg" by hand and run grub-mkconfig by >>> mistake, you'll wipe out your config. It's safer to write it to >>> "/etc/grub.d/40_custom" and "chmod -x" the other files in >>> "/etc/grub.d/". >>> >>> Well "grub2-mkconfig" by itself doesn't write anywhere unless you pass >>> a -o parameter. If you are "accidentally" running "grub2-mkconfig -o >>> /boot/grub/grub.cfg" and it catches you by surprise that >>> /boot/grub/grub.cfg is overwritten, you have bigger problems. >>> >>> Let's not make up problems where there are none. >> >> +1 > > +1000 I was sharing what I do because I've overwritten a manually-edited grub.cfg by running grub-mkconfig/grub2-mkconfig/update-grub (re grub2-mkconfig, I use grub-mkconfig on Gentoo because I set "-multislot") more than once - and I know other sysadmins who've made the same mistake. You can use exactly the same text in 40_grub that you'd use in grub.cfg and have the latter generated. I don't see why anyone would be opposed to that, unless you hate that tool - and hate's never a good rationale for an MO.
Re: [gentoo-dev] grub-2 configuration
On Sat, Oct 8, 2016 at 11:00 AM, Mike Gilbert wrote: > On Oct 8, 2016 10:33 AM, "Tom H" wrote: >> >> Shouldn't "timeout=5", "default=0", "gfxmode=auto", and >> "gfxpayload=keep" be prefixed with "set "? > > Using the set keyword for variable assignments is optional. Many thanks.
Re: [gentoo-dev] grub-2 configuration
On Wed, Oct 5, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Mike Gilbert wrote: > > I have added an example grub.cfg to the gentoo repository. > > https://gitweb.gentoo.org/repo/gentoo.git/commit/?id=ec629c23a6e8cf6c18fa51d69ae11932c7ada3cc > > Please feel free to commit any obvious improvements or corrections. If > you have a common scenario you would like to see added, feel free to > ping me about it. Shouldn't "timeout=5", "default=0", "gfxmode=auto", and "gfxpayload=keep" be prefixed with "set "?
Re: [gentoo-dev] grub-2 configuration
On Tue, Oct 4, 2016 at 11:34 PM, William Hubbs wrote: > > You don't have to use grub-mkconfig. You can write /boot/grub/grub.cfg > by hand if you want, and it appears that the syntax is documented in > the grub info pages. If you write "/boot/grub/grub.cfg" by hand and run grub-mkconfig by mistake, you'll wipe out your config. It's safer to write it to "/etc/grub.d/40_custom" and "chmod -x" the other files in "/etc/grub.d/".
Re: [gentoo-dev] Empty project: LXDE
On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 10:16 PM, james wrote: > On 08/10/2016 04:07 PM, Tom H wrote: >> >> If LXQT's too bloated for you, try Lumina: >> >> https://lumina-desktop.org/ >> >> There's an ebuild. > > I did a quick search and did not find a comparison of lumina to lxqt. > I'd like to see a feature comparison to lxqt; gotta ref on the > comparison? > > thx Tom, You're welcome. Sorry, I have no refs. There may not be a head-to-head comparison and it might make sense because Lumina's more of a WM+ than a DE.
Re: [gentoo-dev] Empty project: LXDE
On Wed, Aug 10, 2016 at 5:06 PM, james wrote: > > I have not had the time to migrate things to lxqt, despite tinkering > around with it. The next system I install, will go direct to lxqt. I > left KDE for many bloated reasons. I sure hope lxqt is light weight, > easy to setup and config and stable. If LXQT's too bloated for you, try Lumina: https://lumina-desktop.org/ There's an ebuild.
Re: [gentoo-dev] usr merge
On Wed, Apr 6, 2016 at 4:04 PM, Richard Yao wrote: > On Apr 6, 2016, at 3:42 AM, Alexis Ballier wrote: >> On Wednesday, April 6, 2016 6:15:58 AM CEST, Richard Yao wrote: >>> >>> Here are the violations: >>> >>> http://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/FHS_3.0/fhs-3.0.html#binEssentialUserCommandBinaries >>> >>> http://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/FHS_3.0/fhs-3.0.html#sbinSystemBinaries >>> >>> http://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/FHS_3.0/fhs-3.0.html#libEssentialSharedLibrariesAndKern >> >> well, those are not violations: fhs mandates a certain set of >> binaries in those paths; this is still the case with a usr-merged >> system. >> >> i thought the symlinks would be a problem, but fhs states: >>> >>> The following directories, or symbolic links to directories, are required >>> in /. >> >> so, really, i dont see any violation there > > Nice. They added that to fix it. More likely you missed it in the past because 2004's FHS 2.3 has "The following directories, or symbolic links to directories, are required in /." in http://refspecs.linuxfoundation.org/FHS_2.3/fhs-2.3.html#REQUIREMENTS
