On 06-08-2012 11:40:57 -0700, Olivier Crête wrote:
> I think they only want to support systemd-in-systemd, not
> systemd-in-random-init-system.
I think neither fits Prefix. So we're back at the starting position.
--
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level
signature.asc
Description: Digita
On Mon, 2012-08-06 at 20:28 +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 06-08-2012 11:16:52 -0700, Olivier Crête wrote:
> > On Mon, 2012-08-06 at 13:56 +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> > > While OpenRC is likely perfectly capable of starting/stopping daemons as
> > > a normal user (with some tweaks), I expect
On 06-08-2012 11:16:52 -0700, Olivier Crête wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-08-06 at 13:56 +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> > While OpenRC is likely perfectly capable of starting/stopping daemons as
> > a normal user (with some tweaks), I expect systemd replacing init, to
> > already have a fair bit of isssues
On Mon, 2012-08-06 at 13:56 +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> While OpenRC is likely perfectly capable of starting/stopping daemons as
> a normal user (with some tweaks), I expect systemd replacing init, to
> already have a fair bit of isssues with being just a normal unprivileged
> user. I may be wr
On Mon, 6 Aug 2012 08:05:42 -0400
Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 7:56 AM, Fabian Groffen
> wrote:
> > While OpenRC is likely perfectly capable of starting/stopping
> > daemons as a normal user (with some tweaks), I expect systemd
> > replacing init, to already have a fair bit of is
On Mon, 6 Aug 2012 07:49:48 -0400
Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 6:42 AM, Fabian Groffen
> wrote:
> > On 06-08-2012 13:37:55 +0300, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> >> > Also, I'm not so sure if this will work correctly for Prefix.
> >>
> >> I'm sure that is easily checked and we will get
On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 7:56 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> While OpenRC is likely perfectly capable of starting/stopping daemons as
> a normal user (with some tweaks), I expect systemd replacing init, to
> already have a fair bit of isssues with being just a normal unprivileged
> user. I may be wron
On 06-08-2012 07:49:48 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 6:42 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> > On 06-08-2012 13:37:55 +0300, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> >> > Also, I'm not so sure if this will work correctly for Prefix.
> >>
> >> I'm sure that is easily checked and we will get feedback
On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 6:42 AM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 06-08-2012 13:37:55 +0300, Samuli Suominen wrote:
>> > Also, I'm not so sure if this will work correctly for Prefix.
>>
>> I'm sure that is easily checked and we will get feedback quickly.
>
> I'm sure systemd/udev will never run in (a) Pr
On Mon, Aug 6, 2012 at 6:20 AM, Michał Górny wrote:
> Most importantly, this allows us to easily find out which packages
> install such files and perform global operations on them. For example,
> if a particular user had systemd locations in INSTALL_MASK and changed
> his mind, he can easily updat
On 06-08-2012 14:02:41 +0300, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> rules files are often small and often get always installed, yet the
> package might be running just fine without udev, the installed rules
> files just don't get used
>
> therefore adding sys-fs/udev dependency to the eclass is out of questi
On 08/06/2012 01:20 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
Ok, a few comments from me.
[ ... ]
>
btw, usb_modeswitch doesn't work if left to /lib/udev with
>=sys-fs/udev-187-r1:
http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-932338-highlight-.html
now you know why this came up and why I committed the -r2 in tree
On 08/06/2012 01:42 PM, Fabian Groffen wrote:
On 06-08-2012 13:37:55 +0300, Samuli Suominen wrote:
Also, I'm not so sure if this will work correctly for Prefix.
I'm sure that is easily checked and we will get feedback quickly.
I'm sure systemd/udev will never run in (a) Prefix, so perhaps it
On 06-08-2012 13:37:55 +0300, Samuli Suominen wrote:
> > Also, I'm not so sure if this will work correctly for Prefix.
>
> I'm sure that is easily checked and we will get feedback quickly.
I'm sure systemd/udev will never run in (a) Prefix, so perhaps it is
more sensical not to pseudo-provide sup
On 08/06/2012 01:20 PM, Michał Górny wrote:
Ok, a few comments from me.
On Mon, 06 Aug 2012 13:00:08 +0300
Samuli Suominen wrote:
--- systemd.eclass 2012-08-06 12:49:20.532528219 +0300
+++ /tmp/systemd.eclass 2012-08-06 12:57:28.333542735 +0300
First of all, I'm not really convinced sy
Ok, a few comments from me.
On Mon, 06 Aug 2012 13:00:08 +0300
Samuli Suominen wrote:
> --- systemd.eclass2012-08-06 12:49:20.532528219 +0300
> +++ /tmp/systemd.eclass 2012-08-06 12:57:28.333542735 +0300
First of all, I'm not really convinced systemd.eclass is a good place
for this.
Patch to avoid duplicating this code to every ebuild.
The second attachment is an example use case for the function.
Soon as this is in, I'll start mass converting the tree for this...
- Samuli
--- systemd.eclass 2012-08-06 12:49:20.532528219 +0300
+++ /tmp/systemd.eclass 2012-08-06 12:57:28.33
17 matches
Mail list logo
