Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?
On Fri, 2008-02-01 at 08:54 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: On Friday 01 February 2008, Natanael Copa wrote: On Thu, 2008-01-31 at 18:46 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: On Thursday 31 January 2008, Natanael Copa wrote: ... I can create a bug on this so we get rid of both perl and debianutils dependency for app-admin/sysklogd. (great for embedded) i dont quite follow ... savelog is already a POSIX script and i dont see it executing perl ... The /etc/cron.daily/syslog.cron executes both savelog and /usr/sbin/syslogd-listfiles - which is a perl script. oh, so you're looking to replace a script syslog provides rather than the savelog script sure, i'd open a bug enhancement request on the topic bug #208560 -nc -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?
On Thu, 2008-01-31 at 18:46 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: On Thursday 31 January 2008, Natanael Copa wrote: On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 12:35 -0500, Philip Webb wrote: 080128 Mike Frysinger wrote: now that the mktemp binary has been moved out of debianutils and integrated straight into coreutils, perhaps it's time to ask how important this package is to everyone. current debianutils is part of system and provides: - installkernel - run-parts - tempfile - savelog - mkboot do people consider these things critical ? i dont know the last time i personally needed/wanted any of these ... 'equery d debianutils' gives me app-admin/sysklogd-1.4.2_pre20061230 (sys-apps/debianutils) app-portage/gentoolkit-0.2.3-r1 (userland_GNU? sys-apps/debianutils) sys-apps/mktemp-1.5 (=sys-apps/debianutils-2.16.2) The 2nd cb ignored, but the others seem important. I have Mktemp-1.5 installed, so what do you mean by your lines 1-2 ? Sysklogd seems to be an important pkg too. savelog is used here to rotate logs from a cron job. I had a user rewriting the whole script the other week so it works without either perl or debianutils. (he replaced 80 lines perl with 7 lines POSIX shell code using sed, awk) I can create a bug on this so we get rid of both perl and debianutils dependency for app-admin/sysklogd. (great for embedded) i dont quite follow ... savelog is already a POSIX script and i dont see it executing perl ... The /etc/cron.daily/syslog.cron executes both savelog and /usr/sbin/syslogd-listfiles - which is a perl script. -mike -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?
On Friday 01 February 2008, Natanael Copa wrote: On Thu, 2008-01-31 at 18:46 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: On Thursday 31 January 2008, Natanael Copa wrote: On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 12:35 -0500, Philip Webb wrote: 080128 Mike Frysinger wrote: now that the mktemp binary has been moved out of debianutils and integrated straight into coreutils, perhaps it's time to ask how important this package is to everyone. current debianutils is part of system and provides: - installkernel - run-parts - tempfile - savelog - mkboot do people consider these things critical ? i dont know the last time i personally needed/wanted any of these ... 'equery d debianutils' gives me app-admin/sysklogd-1.4.2_pre20061230 (sys-apps/debianutils) app-portage/gentoolkit-0.2.3-r1 (userland_GNU? sys-apps/debianutils) sys-apps/mktemp-1.5 (=sys-apps/debianutils-2.16.2) The 2nd cb ignored, but the others seem important. I have Mktemp-1.5 installed, so what do you mean by your lines 1-2 ? Sysklogd seems to be an important pkg too. savelog is used here to rotate logs from a cron job. I had a user rewriting the whole script the other week so it works without either perl or debianutils. (he replaced 80 lines perl with 7 lines POSIX shell code using sed, awk) I can create a bug on this so we get rid of both perl and debianutils dependency for app-admin/sysklogd. (great for embedded) i dont quite follow ... savelog is already a POSIX script and i dont see it executing perl ... The /etc/cron.daily/syslog.cron executes both savelog and /usr/sbin/syslogd-listfiles - which is a perl script. oh, so you're looking to replace a script syslog provides rather than the savelog script sure, i'd open a bug enhancement request on the topic -mike signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?
On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 12:35 -0500, Philip Webb wrote: 080128 Mike Frysinger wrote: now that the mktemp binary has been moved out of debianutils and integrated straight into coreutils, perhaps it's time to ask how important this package is to everyone. current debianutils is part of system and provides: - installkernel - run-parts - tempfile - savelog - mkboot do people consider these things critical ? i dont know the last time i personally needed/wanted any of these ... 'equery d debianutils' gives me app-admin/sysklogd-1.4.2_pre20061230 (sys-apps/debianutils) app-portage/gentoolkit-0.2.3-r1 (userland_GNU? sys-apps/debianutils) sys-apps/mktemp-1.5 (=sys-apps/debianutils-2.16.2) The 2nd cb ignored, but the others seem important. I have Mktemp-1.5 installed, so what do you mean by your lines 1-2 ? Sysklogd seems to be an important pkg too. savelog is used here to rotate logs from a cron job. I had a user rewriting the whole script the other week so it works without either perl or debianutils. (he replaced 80 lines perl with 7 lines POSIX shell code using sed, awk) I can create a bug on this so we get rid of both perl and debianutils dependency for app-admin/sysklogd. (great for embedded) -nc -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?
On Thursday 31 January 2008, Natanael Copa wrote: On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 12:35 -0500, Philip Webb wrote: 080128 Mike Frysinger wrote: now that the mktemp binary has been moved out of debianutils and integrated straight into coreutils, perhaps it's time to ask how important this package is to everyone. current debianutils is part of system and provides: - installkernel - run-parts - tempfile - savelog - mkboot do people consider these things critical ? i dont know the last time i personally needed/wanted any of these ... 'equery d debianutils' gives me app-admin/sysklogd-1.4.2_pre20061230 (sys-apps/debianutils) app-portage/gentoolkit-0.2.3-r1 (userland_GNU? sys-apps/debianutils) sys-apps/mktemp-1.5 (=sys-apps/debianutils-2.16.2) The 2nd cb ignored, but the others seem important. I have Mktemp-1.5 installed, so what do you mean by your lines 1-2 ? Sysklogd seems to be an important pkg too. savelog is used here to rotate logs from a cron job. I had a user rewriting the whole script the other week so it works without either perl or debianutils. (he replaced 80 lines perl with 7 lines POSIX shell code using sed, awk) I can create a bug on this so we get rid of both perl and debianutils dependency for app-admin/sysklogd. (great for embedded) i dont quite follow ... savelog is already a POSIX script and i dont see it executing perl ... -mike signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?
080128 Mike Frysinger wrote: now that the mktemp binary has been moved out of debianutils and integrated straight into coreutils, perhaps it's time to ask how important this package is to everyone. current debianutils is part of system and provides: - installkernel - run-parts - tempfile - savelog - mkboot do people consider these things critical ? i dont know the last time i personally needed/wanted any of these ... 'equery d debianutils' gives me app-admin/sysklogd-1.4.2_pre20061230 (sys-apps/debianutils) app-portage/gentoolkit-0.2.3-r1 (userland_GNU? sys-apps/debianutils) sys-apps/mktemp-1.5 (=sys-apps/debianutils-2.16.2) The 2nd cb ignored, but the others seem important. I have Mktemp-1.5 installed, so what do you mean by your lines 1-2 ? Sysklogd seems to be an important pkg too. What am I missing (smile) ? -- ,, SUPPORT ___//___, Philip Webb : [EMAIL PROTECTED] ELECTRIC /] [] [] [] [] []| Centre for Urban Community Studies TRANSIT`-O--O---' University of Toronto -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?
On Jan 30, 2008 6:35 PM, Philip Webb [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 'equery d debianutils' gives me app-admin/sysklogd-1.4.2_pre20061230 (sys-apps/debianutils) app-portage/gentoolkit-0.2.3-r1 (userland_GNU? sys-apps/debianutils) sys-apps/mktemp-1.5 (=sys-apps/debianutils-2.16.2) The 2nd cb ignored, but the others seem important. I have Mktemp-1.5 installed, so what do you mean by your lines 1-2 ? Sysklogd seems to be an important pkg too. What am I missing (smile) ? Removing debianutils from the system _set_ doesn't mean to completely remove it from the portage tree or user systems. It'll be a dependency of sysklogd and mktemp anyway. This change does not affect you. -- Santiago M. Mola Jabber ID: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?
On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 12:35 -0500, Philip Webb wrote: 'equery d debianutils' gives me app-admin/sysklogd-1.4.2_pre20061230 (sys-apps/debianutils) app-portage/gentoolkit-0.2.3-r1 (userland_GNU? sys-apps/debianutils) sys-apps/mktemp-1.5 (=sys-apps/debianutils-2.16.2) The 2nd cb ignored, but the others seem important. I have Mktemp-1.5 installed, so what do you mean by your lines 1-2 ? Funny enough, mktemp is included in newer coreutils. Sysklogd seems to be an important pkg too. Unless you use metalog, or syslog-ng, or... What am I missing (smile) ? That nothing that you've said counters the package not being needed in the system target. In fact, the packages that you list all explicitly depend on debianutils, so they wouldn't break if we removed it from system. The problem is packages which require debianutils but do *not* depend on it, because it's in system now. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering Strategic Lead Games Developer -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?
On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 10:32 -0800, Chris Gianelloni wrote: That nothing that you've said counters the package not being needed in the system target. In fact, the packages that you list all explicitly depend on debianutils, so they wouldn't break if we removed it from system. The problem is packages which require debianutils but do *not* depend on it, because it's in system now. I'm running a stage build with debianutils removed from system. I'll let everyone know the results. If it works, I'll do the same for a LiveDVD build, which covers most of the major packages in the tree. Sure, there might be a few stragglers after that, but I doubt that there would be too many. -- Chris Gianelloni Release Engineering Strategic Lead Games Developer -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?
On 28-01-2008 07:23:18 -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: do people consider these things critical ? i dont know the last time i personally needed/wanted any of these ... Given that it needs a jumbo patch to compile on non-GNU/Linux systems lacking GNU getopt, I wouldn't mind if it would get dropped from system. -- Fabian Groffen Gentoo on a different level -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?
Mike Frysinger a écrit : do people consider these things critical ? i dont know the last time i personally needed/wanted any of these ... I for one didn't even know what tools it provided ... let alone what I might use them for. Rémi -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 07:23:18 -0500
Mike Frysinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
now that the mktemp binary has been moved out of debianutils and
integrated straight into coreutils, perhaps it's time to ask how
important this package is to everyone. current debianutils is part
of system and provides:
- installkernel
- run-parts
- tempfile
- savelog
- mkboot
do people consider these things critical ? i dont know the last time
i personally needed/wanted any of these ...
I would say drop it from system and add to RDEPEND in kernel-2.eclass
for ${ETYPE} == sources.
Kindest regards,
Yuri.
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?
Mike Frysinger wrote: now that the mktemp binary has been moved out of debianutils and integrated straight into coreutils, perhaps it's time to ask how important this package is to everyone. current debianutils is part of system and provides: - installkernel - run-parts - tempfile - savelog - mkboot do people consider these things critical ? i dont know the last time i personally needed/wanted any of these ... -mike I feel the same as you Mike. Toss it. -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?
Yuri Vasilevski kirjoitti:
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 07:23:18 -0500
Mike Frysinger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
now that the mktemp binary has been moved out of debianutils and
integrated straight into coreutils, perhaps it's time to ask how
important this package is to everyone. current debianutils is part
of system and provides:
- installkernel
- run-parts
- tempfile
- savelog
- mkboot
do people consider these things critical ? i dont know the last time
i personally needed/wanted any of these ...
I would say drop it from system and add to RDEPEND in kernel-2.eclass
for ${ETYPE} == sources.
Kindest regards,
Yuri.
+1
Regards,
Petteri
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?
On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 07:23:18AM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote: now that the mktemp binary has been moved out of debianutils and integrated straight into coreutils, perhaps it's time to ask how important this package is to everyone. current debianutils is part of system and provides: - installkernel installkernel is the only one off the top of my head I think is marginally important. Doing 'make install' in the kernel sources runs it for many arches. -- Robin Hugh Johnson Gentoo Linux Developer Infra Guy E-Mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] GnuPG FP : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85 pgpKMBSGWkmmg.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?
Krzysiek Pawlik kirjoitti:
Yuri Vasilevski wrote:
I would say drop it from system and add to RDEPEND in kernel-2.eclass
for ${ETYPE} == sources.
IMHO that's a bad idea - everybody use some kernel sources, but not
everybody runs `make install'. I'm for dropping debianutils from system.
BSD, prefix etc. I would say breaking make install is worse than
requiring people to keep debianutils installed. They can just use
package.provided if they want to get rid of it.
Regards,
Petteri
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?
Yuri Vasilevski wrote:
I would say drop it from system and add to RDEPEND in kernel-2.eclass
for ${ETYPE} == sources.
IMHO that's a bad idea - everybody use some kernel sources, but not everybody
runs `make install'. I'm for dropping debianutils from system.
--
Krzysiek Pawlik nelchael at gentoo.org key id: 0xBC51
desktop-misc, java, apache, ppc, vim, kernel...
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 19:59:39 +0200 Petteri Räty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: BSD, prefix etc. I would say breaking make install is worse than requiring people to keep debianutils installed. They can just use package.provided if they want to get rid of it. ...which then breaks things that have a real dep upon it. That's a really bad idea, just like absolutely everything else involving package.provided. -- Ciaran McCreesh signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 19:59:39 +0200 Petteri Räty [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Krzysiek Pawlik kirjoitti:
Yuri Vasilevski wrote:
I would say drop it from system and add to RDEPEND in kernel-2.eclass
for ${ETYPE} == sources.
IMHO that's a bad idea - everybody use some kernel sources, but not
everybody runs `make install'. I'm for dropping debianutils from
system.
BSD, prefix etc. I would say breaking make install is worse than
requiring people to keep debianutils installed. They can just use
package.provided if they want to get rid of it.
What's wrong with making it an optional dependency? Something like a
useflag
makeinstall - Set this if you use 'make install' to install your kernels.
which would trigger the dependency. That way, both groups of people have
their way without breaking dependencies, right?
MSB
--
You know that you're lonely when you start laughing at your own jokes.
--
gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?
Ciaran McCreesh kirjoitti: On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 19:59:39 +0200 Petteri Räty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: BSD, prefix etc. I would say breaking make install is worse than requiring people to keep debianutils installed. They can just use package.provided if they want to get rid of it. ...which then breaks things that have a real dep upon it. That's a really bad idea, just like absolutely everything else involving package.provided. Indeed but users do stupid stuff every once in a while. Regards, Petteri signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] debianutils: system worthy ?
On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 21:43:38 +0100 Matthias B. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What's wrong with making it an optional dependency? Something like a useflag Because if this would be done consistently we'd end up with several thousand use flags long term, not really what I'd call managable. Unfortunately use flags aren't the answer to everything. Marius -- gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
