[gentoo-dev] openrc-0.5.1 arrived in the tree

Eray Aslan · External Since: Apr 20, 2007 Posts: 5

On 14.10.2009 03:17, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Tuesday 13 October 2009 19:30:52 Joshua Saddler wrote:
>> All that to say, Tommy (et al), is that the idea of expecting users to
>> magically know everything and not to offer any documentation *in advance*
>> . . . is a silly idea. Good lord, can you imagine the shitstorm the X11
>> team would have gone through if they'd tried *that* without first writing
>> up xserver 1.5 and 1.6 migration guides?!
>
> we arent talking migrations that are forced onto everyone. we're talking
> about new code that users have to *opt in* for ("new net") that is only
> available in unstable. expecting everything in testing to be documented up
> front is unreasonable.

While true in general, I cannot agree with you in this case. This is
not some random app we are talking about. It is a change in init
scripts that might render our servers inaccessible if things go wrong.
Please bear in mind that we have servers operating in datacenters in
other countries and network loss is the worst kind of bug you can
inflict upon us.

There is no documantation upstream. At least we have some docs in g.o
(kudos to whomever wrote it) but it is old (there is no mention of
oldnet USE flag for example). And IUSE="... +oldnet ..." is too fragile
a solution.

All I am saying is that this is a so important change that we should
have gotten it right from the beginning. Openrc should not have been
unmasked without proper documentation.

--
Eray

Nirbheek Chauhan · External Since: May 26, 2009 Posts: 6

[completely offtopic from this thread, please fork thread if/when replying]

On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 6:40 AM, Jeroen Roovers <jer.TakeThisOut@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Since the advent of outside overlays and layman,
> we've seen many more bugs that only got discovered when the tree was
> synced with some developer overlay, or when a Great Unveiling was done
> after limited, private, small scale testing (as with many GNOME and KDE
> releases, not to point the finger).

If GNOME is involved, I would like you to point some fingers and tell
us exactly where you think we went wrong; exactly which "Great
Unveiling" are you talking about? If you don't tell us what we did
wrong, you surely can't expect us to fix the problem Smile

All GNOME releases are incremental, so in 99% of the cases, the
migration path is straightforward. If as an hppa arch dev, if you were
inconvenienced, we would like to correct the problem since it would've
definitely affected other archs too (and we know how understaffed you
guys are Smile

--
~Nirbheek Chauhan

Gentoo GNOME+Mozilla Team

Branko Badrljica · External Since: Oct 16, 2009 Posts: 7

Dawid Węgliński wrote:
> sapphire ~ # qlist openrc | grep doc
> /usr/share/doc/openrc/net.example
> /usr/share/doc/openrc/net.default
>
>
As said, I already did that. In fact, that was the first thing I was
looking for. After seeing post here about radical changes in v0.5, that
was the first thing I did. But net.example showed NO obvious changes.
Nevertheless, I tried both- my original net and one that I derived from
net.example anew.

Just for the fun of it, I reemerged openrc-0.5-r1 just now, edited
net.example, and tried both- my original net and edited net.example.

This time, machine boots and sets both lo and eth0 without any error
message, but it fails to set default route, so without manual "route add
default gw 192.168.1.1" net is dead. And machine is stuck at "checking
local filesystems " for a whole few minutes now without apprently doing
anything, but this is besides the point here.

And, for the umpteenth time:

1. openrc was remerged with default "oldnet" flag

2. I did check net.example

3. All I asked is for this things to be available. Few words, if nothing
else. Preferrably on news, so I can get them after emerge but bugzilla
is also acceptable. Forums are nice, but not adequate communication
channel for such purpose.

I found only one chap with a problem close to mine on forum, and he was
left without an answer:

net.eth0 doesn't work at boot
<http://forums.gentoo.org/viewtopic-t-797108-highlight-openrc.html>

schism · External Since: Oct 16, 2009 Posts: 3

On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 01:03:22AM +0200, Dawid Węgliński wrote:
> On Wednesday 14 October 2009 00:59:26 schism.TakeThisOut@subverted.org wrote:
> > On Wed, Oct 14, 2009 at 12:52:06AM +0200, Dawid Węgliński wrote:
> > > sapphire ~ # qlist openrc | grep doc
> > > /usr/share/doc/openrc/net.example
> > > /usr/share/doc/openrc/net.default
> >
> > That would be lovely if the concerns being raised weren't about 0.5.1,
> > that's the output from a 0.4.3 series install.
> >
> # qlist -ICv openrc
> sys-apps/openrc-0.5.1
>
> Yeah, you're right. Wink

Oh, you mean the docs that only cover the "old" configuration mechanism
and are only installed with USE=oldnet? How silly to think that changes
that are likely to take testers' machines offline should be documented,
if nothing else with, say, 'ewarn "USE=-oldnet changes the network
configuration syntax, check it before rebooting"'. I wasn't bitten
(because I am more cautious than that), but I WAS annoyed that a package
was sent out to be tested with zero instructions on the drastic changes
it made.