On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 07:41:39PM +1000, Sam Jorna wrote:
> On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 10:57:44AM +0200, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
> > On 05/04/2016 10:52 AM, Sam Jorna wrote:
> > > On Wed, May 04, 2016 at 10:00:05AM +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
> > >>>>>>> On Wed, 4 May 2016, Austin English wrote:
> > >>
> > >>>> Your list of affected packages obtained with "git grep" in the
> > >>>> Portage tree will not be complete, since the command won't catch
> > >>>> any init scripts installed from elsewhere. You should look for the
> > >>>> set of installed files instead.
> > >>
> > >>> How is that relevant here at all? I'm cleaning up portage installed
> > >>> init scripts, [...]
> > >>
> > >> You are cleaning up only those init scripts that are installed from
> > >> FILESDIR, but you will miss the ones that are installed from a file
> > >> in SRC_URI.
> > >
> > > Perhaps an alternate way to do it would be to have a QA check look at
> > > any files installed to ${D}etc/init.d/ and throw a warning if their
> > > shebang is "#!/sbin/runscript"
> > >
> >
> > A repoman check is a much saner approach, I'm not convinced there is
> > sufficient need for this change to begin with, in particular to start
> > touching a wide range of packages. Breaking backwards compatibility in
> > any way should have a darn good reason, and I haven't seen one yet
>
> I'm not arguing for or against it in general, just in terms of technical
> implementation.
>
> That being said, a repoman check would only catch those distributed in
> ${FILESDIR} as well. My thinking with the above was to also identify
> those installed from distfiles to be handled accordingly.Actually, you won't need to worry about any qa checks in portage, because I am going to put a deprecation warning in OpenRC upstream which will be displayed when a service script invokes runscript instructing you to convert to openrc-run. OpenRC will keep runscript, with this warning, for a while. William
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
