Mailing List Archive

1 2 3 4 5 6 7  View All
Re: Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users [ In reply to ]
Ciaran McCreesh posted on Wed, 22 May 2013 16:24:05 +0100 as excerpted:

> On Tue, 21 May 2013 21:37:25 +0000 (UTC)
> Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> wrote:
>> Ciaran McCreesh posted on Tue, 21 May 2013 14:50:04 +0100 as
>> excerpted:
>> > On Tue, 21 May 2013 04:45:12 +0000 (UTC)
>> > Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> wrote:
>> >> But the point you're missing is that INSTALL_MASK is NOT a hack.
>> >
>> > Sure it is. It's a hack and remains a hack until there's a way of
>> > using it without risk of breakage.
>>
>> LOL. Better turn off that computer then. By your definition it's a
>> hack. Or at least remove anything gentoo related from it. That's a
>> hack too. Oh, and that stove and microwave, better throw them away
>> too, because leave something cooking too long and... FIRE! So
>> they're hacks too.
>
> That's nonsense, and you know it. There is a big difference between a
> carefully designed feature that only breaks if someone screws up, and
> something which breaks arbitrarily with no warning. One of the things
> about working with computers is that, if something breaks, it's because
> someone screwed up. If you really think you can't use your computer
> without something breaking, you should carefully consider who is doing
> the screwing up.

That's the point. It *IS* possible to use INSTALL_MASK sanely, without
something breaking. Applying your exact phrasing to the topic at hand:
"If you really think[1] you can't use INSTALL_MASK without something
breaking, you should carefully consider who is doing the screwing up."

[1] Think: Or for that matter, demonstrate to yourself and others.

--
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
Re: Re: Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users [ In reply to ]
On 22/05/2013 23:39, Daniel Campbell wrote:
> I do not consider Gentoo to be only about my own choices, but as a user,
> who else's choices am I going to consider when I administer my system?
> I'm happy for any new choices as long as they don't step on mine. I
> think that's fair.

Your choices are necessarily constrained by the fact that other people
also have choices, and those people use a copy of the same machinery you
use to implement their choices.

You do not operate in a vacuum, and you cannot consider just your own
choices and get a sane result - Godel proved that this cannot happen in
this universe, in much the same way you cannot multiple two and three
and get nine.

Now, you cannot know what choices I've made here on my systems, but you
do know that I have choices and you must consider that fact when making
your choices. This has many side-effects, but the most common is that
often you have to give a little to get a lot. In the case of systemd -
people like Canek have the choice to use it, and to give him that choice
you pretty much have to tolerate that all our machines are going to get
unit files. That's the bit where you give a little.

It works in reverse too. If you want KDE you get .desktop files and so
does everyone else, and they too must give a little.

If the generic machinery (aka package managers) that deals with this
stuff doesn't quite cut the mustard as you would like, you still retain
the ultimate choice:

rm

or it's expedient cousin

INSTALL_MASK

--
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckinnon@gmail.com
Re: Re: Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users [ In reply to ]
On Wed, 22 May 2013 16:39:25 -0500
Daniel Campbell <dlcampbell@gmx.com> wrote:

> I'm curious as to why you consider users who want to save disk space
> (openrc or systemd, or other packages, it doesn't matter) as
> fundamentalists.

I'd call them using other words but I didn't want to be that inpolite.
Seriously, there are bigger problems in the world than a few text
files. And much bigger useless space consumers which you don't even
notice because they don't have the 'systemd' name on them.

If you care about disk space, then find the biggest consumers and try
to work on them. Otherwise, you're just picking. And that's close to
fundamentalism.

--
Best regards,
Micha³ Górny
Re: Re: Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users [ In reply to ]
On Thu, 23 May 2013 05:30:25 +0000 (UTC)
Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> wrote:

> That's the point. It *IS* possible to use INSTALL_MASK sanely,
> without something breaking.

Nobody said it isn't, I agree hacks can be used without breaking
things; the point is that that doesn't make it a good idea in general.

> Applying your exact phrasing to the topic at hand: "If you really
> think[1] you can't use INSTALL_MASK without something breaking, you
> should carefully consider who is doing the screwing up."

If you really think[1] you need INSTALL_MASK for a few small files when
there are much larger consumers around, you should carefully consider
whether what you are doing is the right thing. ("OMG systemd units!")

> [1] Think: Or for that matter, demonstrate to yourself and others.

--
With kind regards,

Tom Wijsman (TomWij)
Gentoo Developer

E-mail address : TomWij@gentoo.org
GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D
GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D
Re: Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users [ In reply to ]
Tom Wijsman posted on Thu, 23 May 2013 08:57:02 +0200 as excerpted:

> If you really think[1] you need INSTALL_MASK for a few small files when
> there are much larger consumers around, you should carefully consider
> whether what you are doing is the right thing. ("OMG systemd units!")
>
>> [1] Think: Or for that matter, demonstrate to yourself and others.

Definitely agreed, there. IMO that whole issue's a tempest in a teapot,
as the saying goes, not only because it's a trivial use of space, but
because the solution for any gentooer that actually cares is equally
trivial.

That's part of what gentoo is all about, having the tools available to
simply do things like this for those who care to (see the whole Larry the
Cow thing), which we do... as a major bullet point of what makes us
gentoo. =:^)

--
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman
Re: Re: Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users [ In reply to ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 05/23/2013 01:41 AM, Micha³ Górny wrote:
> On Wed, 22 May 2013 16:39:25 -0500 Daniel Campbell
> <dlcampbell@gmx.com> wrote:
>
>> I'm curious as to why you consider users who want to save disk
>> space (openrc or systemd, or other packages, it doesn't matter)
>> as fundamentalists.
>
> I'd call them using other words but I didn't want to be that
> inpolite. Seriously, there are bigger problems in the world than a
> few text files. And much bigger useless space consumers which you
> don't even notice because they don't have the 'systemd' name on
> them.
>
> If you care about disk space, then find the biggest consumers and
> try to work on them. Otherwise, you're just picking. And that's
> close to fundamentalism.
>

I can't speak for others who wish to rid their systems of systemd, but
personally I look for any excessive use of space on my HDD, despite it
being rather large. Since you brought it up, which packages can you
think of that most or all Gentoo boxes will have that take up more
considerable amounts of files or disk space? I'm honestly interested
in *anything* that lowers the disk usage of my OSes; to a point,
anyway. Supporting X or Y codec or feature in the kernel would be more
important than saving 50kB in the kernel binary, for instance.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJRnc0WAAoJEJUrb08JgYgH8I0H/RqmDrgkexeLCaBB2RDXKyjv
EAZeVQvjNuxzTJz5Qr+CNHgpAk58YCZVcH+IBspD3Ks1DatKzyoSxuwwG70lfDmX
k/Rp9T+YL/gZnC3Ey6x/ScAwZIDlDbbZO3xwOt+3fHZEhiCE4IFEsCiaWCwEGHV1
NrROzDRBICYc9KePAtksqvYEovu8ex2JCAbthHhDb7fKvr3TqWCBzWtbSMVr0x9k
ZWliahhmEx7IjZ65/yvv/AM2JYzLwaM1hwQxYUX+myTK5YFjMAaMLMZrEgiWp6KZ
a8R0sW7SqbBlbP2z7nJjCrlggDYqMMF4Mv1x7uT0QPiiRxq32+FHcJinwecTHS8=
=sOIU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Re: Re: Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users [ In reply to ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Thu, 23 May 2013 03:02:30 -0500
Daniel Campbell <dlcampbell@gmx.com> wrote:

> I can't speak for others who wish to rid their systems of systemd, but
> personally I look for any excessive use of space on my HDD, despite it
> being rather large. Since you brought it up, which packages can you
> think of that most or all Gentoo boxes will have that take up more
> considerable amounts of files or disk space? I'm honestly interested
> in *anything* that lowers the disk usage of my OSes; to a point,
> anyway. Supporting X or Y codec or feature in the kernel would be more
> important than saving 50kB in the kernel binary, for instance.

These things are likely documented on websites on the internet, on wikis
related to Gentoo and on our forums; if not, you can always start a new
thread on the Gentoo Forums, a new discussion on social media (Google+,
#gentoo-chat on FreeNode, the gentoo-user ML, ...) or so.

Feel free to ping me by mail if you do so, I'll be happy to help...

If you are an user that wishes to contribute to gentoo-dev, please stay
on topic in the thread you are discussing in as well as with the goal
of the ML; if you think we should implement or document space cleaning
better, then you're always welcome to start a new thread about that.

Thank you in advance.

- --
With kind regards,

Tom Wijsman (TomWij)
Gentoo Developer

E-mail address : TomWij@gentoo.org
GPG Public Key : 6D34E57D
GPG Fingerprint : C165 AF18 AB4C 400B C3D2 ABF0 95B2 1FCD 6D34 E57D
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux)

iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJRneV4AAoJEJWyH81tNOV9i8kIAJ8ukPzgwMCFcNVc9u/4PFPh
r3T2bHUNZDK7tZoOtjgdQsiEhwtZGThDaIbNbJ3xvAzqh0gd/mY2qUDBKSZRX8oS
JzFK86ZhjKqwm8TBZH/kXTRx98IgV6XxGmsDaGO0c9Zy0lQOzjhdhcCIpzVQwCa9
tZ51n0YlZQcCmL7ZU66/7Nd9Wrx6M6in9Jik6TSk7DH9ACs6IxTKG2WF1kVShI2m
rd50w//F2ACHHZ0pXWjX9XJmNMOkD+jjHI/yV23GvObXJ8ZqXiicAIAT7G89YtBi
G1ew93E2p9WQ06qIFSMfl/+4yQYTfHFRkSpetTAIkpXfAPruoXNhGmaDmadY+is=
=V7zd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Re: Re: Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users [ In reply to ]
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 05/23/2013 04:02 AM, Daniel Campbell wrote:
>
>
> I can't speak for others who wish to rid their systems of systemd,
> but personally I look for any excessive use of space on my HDD,
> despite it being rather large. Since you brought it up, which
> packages can you think of that most or all Gentoo boxes will have
> that take up more considerable amounts of files or disk space? I'm
> honestly interested in *anything* that lowers the disk usage of my
> OSes; to a point, anyway. Supporting X or Y codec or feature in the
> kernel would be more important than saving 50kB in the kernel
> binary, for instance.
>

It's not even that we don't agree with you, it's that you're asking
package and/or PM maintainers to do a bunch of work to save you a few
kilobytes of disk space. Their time is better spent elsewhere, I promise.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
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=gYkv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Re: Re: Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users [ In reply to ]
(Late reply due to busy week, just want to clarify a small detail)

On Sun, May 19, 2013 16:34, Peter Stuge wrote:
> J. Roeleveld wrote:
>> I don't see how this will avoid the issue of a limited amount of
>> inodes.
>> That is what I usually run out of before the disk is full when
>> storing lots of smaller files.
>
> I guess the number of unit files is on the order of hundreds, as long
> as you haven't configured an INSTALL_MASK to avoid installing them.
> (Why haven't you?)
>
> Are you saying that a few hundred inodes more will break many systems?
>
> It doesn't seem very likely to me.

Peter,

I agree, it is not likely, but this was in relation to embedded devices
where diskspace is often at a premium.
I will probably start a new thread on gentoo-user about inodes and
filesystems configuration later this year.

--
Joost

ps. no need to reply to this :)
Re: Re: Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users [ In reply to ]
On Tue, May 21, 2013 09:03, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> I don't like gnu info files. Neither me nor anyone I know can figure out
> how to drive info.

This reminded me of my experience with info-files. Don't know how long ago
it was that I used them as I find google to be a much more useful
resource.

But you might be interested in the following:

* app-text/info2html
Available versions: (2.0) *2.0
{{vhosts}}
Homepage: http://info2html.sourceforge.net/
Description: Converts GNU .info files to HTML

I haven't tried it myself yet. (Ignore the "hardmask" part in the output,
that's because the portage-filesystem is not automatically mounted)

--
Joost
Re: Re: Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users [ In reply to ]
>>>>> On Fri, 24 May 2013, J Roeleveld wrote:

> This reminded me of my experience with info-files. Don't know how
> long ago it was that I used them as I find google to be a much more
> useful resource.

> But you might be interested in the following:

> * app-text/info2html
> Available versions: (2.0) *2.0
> {{vhosts}}
> Homepage: http://info2html.sourceforge.net/
> Description: Converts GNU .info files to HTML

> I haven't tried it myself yet.

Usually the result is much better if you start from the Texinfo source
and use texi2any --html (included with sys-apps/texinfo itself) for
conversion.

Ulrich
Re: Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users [ In reply to ]
On Wed, May 15, 2013 at 03:41:31PM +0200, Fabio Erculiani wrote:
> And now that GNOME 3.8 is out, the game starts over again: logind is a
> hard requirement, logind is part of systemd, starting logind (which
> replaces consolekit) is not that trivial as you may think (and is the
> thing I started to work on anyway).

I'm not aware of GNOME 3.8 having a hard requirement on logind. Could
you please show where that is?

--
Regards,
Olav
Re: Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users [ In reply to ]
Olav Vitters schrieb:
>> And now that GNOME 3.8 is out, the game starts over again: logind is a
>> hard requirement, logind is part of systemd, starting logind (which
>> replaces consolekit) is not that trivial as you may think (and is the
>> thing I started to work on anyway).
> I'm not aware of GNOME 3.8 having a hard requirement on logind. Could
> you please show where that is?

The bug report about this issue states to which extent GNOME 3.8 needs
logind, and contains pointers to the relevant commits.
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=464944


Best regards,
Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
Re: Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users [ In reply to ]
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 02:04:38PM +0200, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
> Olav Vitters schrieb:
> >> And now that GNOME 3.8 is out, the game starts over again: logind is a
> >> hard requirement, logind is part of systemd, starting logind (which
> >> replaces consolekit) is not that trivial as you may think (and is the
> >> thing I started to work on anyway).
> > I'm not aware of GNOME 3.8 having a hard requirement on logind. Could
> > you please show where that is?
>
> The bug report about this issue states to which extent GNOME 3.8 needs
> logind, and contains pointers to the relevant commits.
> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=464944

That bugreport is regarding an optional dependency for the power
handling. It is correct that Ubuntu will switch from ConsoleKit to
logind, so it does make sense to either maintain ConsoleKit or use
logind. But it still is an optional dependency. I do agree with
https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=464944#c11 (probably easier for
all to just use it, it does not require systemd to be the init).

--
Regards,
Olav
Re: Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users [ In reply to ]
Olav Vitters schrieb:
>> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=464944
> That bugreport is regarding an optional dependency for the power
> handling. It is correct that Ubuntu will switch from ConsoleKit to
> logind, so it does make sense to either maintain ConsoleKit or use
> logind. But it still is an optional dependency.

You are correct that it is not a hard dependency in a strict sense.
However, suspend support and session management are not obscure
seldom-used functions. So logind becomes a hard requirement for enough
users which justifies calling it that way.


Best regards,
Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn
Re: Making systemd more accessible to "normal" users [ In reply to ]
On Fri, Jun 07, 2013 at 02:34:27PM +0200, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
> Olav Vitters schrieb:
> >> https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=464944
> > That bugreport is regarding an optional dependency for the power
> > handling. It is correct that Ubuntu will switch from ConsoleKit to
> > logind, so it does make sense to either maintain ConsoleKit or use
> > logind. But it still is an optional dependency.
>
> You are correct that it is not a hard dependency in a strict sense.
> However, suspend support and session management are not obscure
> seldom-used functions. So logind becomes a hard requirement for enough
> users which justifies calling it that way.

You can still use ConsoleKit, why are you saying session management? The
suspend I'm not sure about.

Regarding hard requirment:
You do *not* need systemd to compile GNOME. You do *not* need logind. We
do make use of various APIs and you're encouraged/recommended to use a
few things (either API or e.g. logind).

If it is phrased as "hard requirement" this continues the messages on
this gentoo-dev where it is suggested that things are forced. In
practice we do not have a hard requirement. AFAIK nobody stepped up to
maintain ConsoleKit. Ubuntu would, but they went with logind.

I'd encourage people to actually maintain ConsoleKit. Saying we use
something that's maintained and solved some design issues in ConsoleKit
is a bit easy.

--
Regards,
Olav

1 2 3 4 5 6 7  View All