| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
khayyam
Watchman
Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 6227
Location: Room 101
|
 Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2014 3:14 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| TomWij wrote: | | If you think this through; in the short term OpenRC continues to act as default, but long term it will feel as that the concept of a default will fade away. This is something I think Gentoo should work towards [...] |
TomWij ... this might be a good time to also introduce tags to user profiles on the forum (and elsewhere one would hope) which identify which init system is in use. This way the community can put its user support behind such "work" by ignoring the calls for assistance from one or other camp (or both ... or neither ... as the particular whims of the user dictates). Such a move (forwards, or backwards ... it matters not) might highlight the enormous contributions made (to linux as a whole) by users and save those of us who care about such things the hassle of having to divine the inextricable workings behind the minds if this "standardised base system" (aka, Lennarts' "strict policy"). This might risk bringing the entire linux ecology to a standstill, but seeing as this is work is entirely voluntary I don't see how else it can be handled ... and others will no doubt pick up the slack (or some clever dolt will write "software" to do it ... as the mantra goes).
I'm looking onto filing a claim for reimbursement for all hours so far invested (since '94) in the hope that the behemoth of cash cows will poop golden holidays in my direction ... or should that fail, disinvestment ...
One final point: no, the irony is not lost on me that this juncture is of my own making, I was quite aware of what all my free labour was funding ... but the deeper irony is that while upstream holds the trump cards they have yet to run a meter without active users slopping out the bilges, and other odious tasks ... all the things that made linux distributions even remotely possible.
best ... khay
Last edited by khayyam on Tue Mar 18, 2014 3:21 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
krinn
Watchman
Joined: 02 May 2003
Posts: 7470
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2014 3:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TomWij wrote: | If you think this through; in the short term OpenRC continues to act as default, but long term it will feel as that the concept of a default will fade away. This is something I think Gentoo should work towards; for example, that can even mean that another option could become a Olde Fashioned Gentooee flavored stage3. To base this on more actual data; grepping case insensitive for "OpenRC" and "init" through all Council meeting logs and summaries, it has never been brought up as a default, as favored or something along those lines.
|
Having a stage3 with systemd is against Gentoo project itself : http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Base
| Quote: | | The Base System Project provides an umbrella project for keeping the system tools, libraries, compilers and layout consistent for all the various architectures under Gentoo Linux. |
Re-put that on table once systemd is running on all arch.
Also don't try to tag Gentoo stage3 "Old Fashion"... No it's not old fashion it's BASE GENTOO. What we call "old fashion" is openrc+(mdev or static dev) in no way we speak about Base Gentoo as "old fashion".
Any systemd fans not happy with that can fork Gentoo, name it like he wish with a systemd stage3 file and leave us alone !
And if you wonder why OpenRC is default on Gentoo : It was made FOR Gentoo as an evolution to baselayout1. Only other project respecting Gentoo Base Project may challenge that default. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
666threesixes666
Veteran
Joined: 31 May 2011
Posts: 1248
Location: 42.68n 85.41w
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2014 4:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| TomWij wrote: | | A systemd stage3 is being talked about, as well as worked towards (see https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=482702 for instance); it would help in such way that a migration becomes superfluous, such that you can start with a systemd stage3 that works and easily install whatever you need by setting your profile and emerging world. If you think this through; in the short term OpenRC continues to act as default, but long term it will feel as that the concept of a default will fade away. This is something I think Gentoo should work towards; for example, that can even mean that another option could become a Olde Fashioned Gentooee flavored stage3. To base this on more actual data; grepping case insensitive for "OpenRC" and "init" through all Council meeting logs and summaries, it has never been brought up as a default, as favored or something along those lines. |
tomwij you sir are my hero. why start with openrc stage when you know you're installing gnome just to rip out openrc? id like to see a busybox, & runit stage3s also. choice from the ground level on up sounds good to me.     |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ulenrich
Veteran
Joined: 10 Oct 2010
Posts: 1480
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2014 8:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
@mv
shortly stating my expectations about kDbus:
1. If upstream kernel.org assumes kDbus can be safely implemented and though they introduce it into the mainline kernel,
2. If performance of kDbus can be doubled and response times even better optimized by using realtime facilities of the kernel
3. If kDbus will be the standard ipc mechanism Linux will have, because every distro riding on systemd
I'd expect application developers to depend on systemd even more in the future.
Any major incident because of this new security hole cannot stop this move: There will be a myriad policy fixes tried instead. What do you expect?
PS: I admit to have introduced the term "religion" as a metaphorical game to stop wishful thinking here ... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anon-E-moose
Watchman
Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 6097
Location: Dallas area
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2014 9:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| krinn wrote: | | Also don't try to tag Gentoo stage3 "Old Fashion"... No it's not old fashion it's BASE GENTOO. What we call "old fashion" is openrc+(mdev or static dev) in no way we speak about Base Gentoo as "old fashion". |
I think that response was to the mention of olde fashioned gentoo by Neddy.
Now on to more general topics.
I personally don't care if they want to make a systemd stage3 no more than I care if they want to make a gnome only stage 3.
I do care that an openrc stage 3 continues to be created.
_________________
PRIME x570-pro, 3700x, 6.1 zen kernel
gcc 13, profile 17.0 (custom bare multilib), openrc, wayland |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mv
Watchman
Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 6747
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2014 10:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
| ulenrich wrote: | 1. If upstream kernel.org assumes kDbus can be safely implemented and though they introduce it into the mainline kernel,
2. If performance of kDbus can be doubled and response times even better optimized by using realtime facilities of the kernel
3. If kDbus will be the standard ipc mechanism Linux will have, because every distro riding on systemd |
I agree with this expectation. However, note the if in point 1; I am not familiar with details, but as I understood, except for performance issues and implementation, there is not so much difference between dbus and kdbus concerning security. From the beginning, systemd did not rely on polkit for dbus policies. Why should it be so different for kdbus, especially when it seems that they are currently even implementing a solution not hard-depending on polkit?
This is not a rhetorical question: Maybe you know some technical details about kdbus which I do not know. As I said, I have never delved into kdbus details (and do not have the time for it now).
| Quote: | | There will be a myriad policy fixes tried instead. |
Sure, there will be. Just like there are myriad of fixes with every new browser release, and everybody knows that there will always be security holes in every browser. However, everybody knows that it is the mere complexity which prevents browsers from ever being safe, and everybody knows that polkit has about the same type of complexity. The solution (and need) to drop polkit whenever it is not absolutely necessary is so obvious.
| Quote: | | I admit to have introduced the term "religion" as a metaphorical game to stop wishful thinking here |
Perhaps to believe in a remainder of sanity and people not only implementing things to do evil things and force others under their will is only wishful thinking, but I have grown up in a somewhat free software community, and cannot believe that all these people have become crazy and evil. Yes, believing about something "good in man" is perhaps indeed sort of religion. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ulenrich
Veteran
Joined: 10 Oct 2010
Posts: 1480
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2014 11:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mv wrote: | | As I said, I have never delved into kdbus details (and do not have the time for it now). |
I was lazy recently and wanted to wait >system-208 be unmasked. But I quickly found in systemd git sources: | PORTING_DBUS1 wrote: | POLICY
The kernel enforces only very limited policy on names. It will not do
access filtering by userspace payload, and thus not by interface or
method name.
This ultimately means that most fine-grained policy enforcement needs
to be done by the receiving process. We recommend using PolicyKit for
any more complex checks. However, libraries should make simple static
policy decisions regarding privileged/unprivileged method calls
easy. We recommend doing this by enabling KDBUS_ATTACH_CAPS and
KDBUS_ATTACH_CREDS for incoming messages, and then discerning client
access by some capability, or if sender and receiver UIDs match. |
Additionally dbus message recievers will rely on bloom filters to get their messages, hash powered regular expressions. But a security enforcing policy only seems to be provided using PolicyKit. But not enforced by systemd - only recommended! (the potential dependency outsourced to downstream consumers of kDbus)
| mv wrote: | | Quote: | | There will be a myriad policy fixes tried instead. |
Sure, there will be. Just like there are myriad of fixes with every new browser release, and everybody knows that there will always be security holes in every browser. However, everybody knows that it is the mere complexity which prevents browsers from ever being safe, and everybody knows that polkit has about the same type of complexity. The solution (and need) to drop polkit whenever it is not absolutely necessary is so obvious. |
The situation will be very different from the browser case!
As you can see above systemd tries to out-source the security decissions. Therefore you might expect an expert developer of the downstream consumer application to take care. All one might hope his application has a fixed number of cases. Or the developer forbids all and allows a restricted set of cases he knows will work safely.
Uuups, is it different from the browser case, really? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anon-E-moose
Watchman
Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 6097
Location: Dallas area
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2014 12:19 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ulenrich wrote: | The situation will be very different from the browser case!
As you can see above systemd tries to out-source the security decissions. |
All one can say is that per the note in git that they aren't planning on doing anything right now
That doesn't mean that when 211 or later hits the streets that there won't be any policy handling in it.
_________________
PRIME x570-pro, 3700x, 6.1 zen kernel
gcc 13, profile 17.0 (custom bare multilib), openrc, wayland |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ant P.
Watchman
Joined: 18 Apr 2009
Posts: 6920
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2014 12:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| krinn wrote: | | Also don't try to tag Gentoo stage3 "Old Fashion"... No it's not old fashion it's BASE GENTOO. What we call "old fashion" is openrc+(mdev or static dev) in no way we speak about Base Gentoo as "old fashion". |
"Old fashioned" would be a stage1 install. Which, come to think of it, was intended exactly for the use case of bootstrapping a new installation with an exotic configuration. Maybe the systemd proponents should try doing that and let us know how it goes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
khayyam
Watchman
Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 6227
Location: Room 101
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2014 1:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ulenrich wrote: | | PS: I admit to have introduced the term "religion" as a metaphorical game to stop wishful thinking here ... |
ulenrich ... which is an abuse of the term metaphor: a figure of speech that describes a subject by asserting that it is, on some point of comparison, the same as another otherwise unrelated object. So, what is it that you are comparing exactly ... what is the "subject" here? Allow me to use a metaphor in the same manner: your use of metaphor is a fallacy (see, that's just a "statement", not a "metaphor"). What you are doing in fact is an "association": "all discussion of x is irrational ... just like religion is seen to be" ... please stop it.
best ... khay |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mv
Watchman
Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 6747
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2014 2:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ulenrich wrote: | This ultimately means that most fine-grained policy enforcement needs
to be done by the receiving process. |
As I said: I cannot see so much difference to dbus here, concerning security.
| Quote: | We recommend using PolicyKit for
any more complex checks. |
It's not surprising that they recommend it. "More complex checks" should not be needed for just running systemd.
| Quote: | However, libraries should make simple static
policy decisions regarding privileged/unprivileged method calls
easy. We recommend doing this by... |
The major question concerning systemd is: How do the systemd libs handle it? Do they rely on polkit and if you do not use it then any user can request anything from systemd? Or do they require the message being sent by root or with the mentioned capabilities (which is AFAIK how it is handled, currently). If they do, I am not so worried, because I do not want some fine-grained capabilities over kdbus - if in doubt they just block everything except from root, this is fine and secure.
| Quote: | | As you can see above systemd tries to out-source the security decissions |
This was also my impression. Which means that systemd and polkit remain separate projects which for the "vertical integrated" system (with many user-convenience features) is recommended to be used together but which for a normal server/desktop (when no root-only features should be used by all users) can also be well used without polkit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TomWij
Retired Dev
Joined: 04 Jul 2012
Posts: 1553
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2014 3:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| steveL wrote: | | You talk of "migration" as if it were a big thing |
For some users it is; that's why work is put into this, to make it a smaller and easier thing for them.
| steveL wrote: | So a systemd stage3, is much less capable than an openrc stage3 which can be used for both. By all means do one, no-one's stopping you.
| Quote: | | If you think this through; in the short term OpenRC continues to act as default, but long term it will feel as that the concept of a default will fade away. |
In your head perhaps, not in mine, for the reasons given. If you don't want to acknowledge those, that's fine, too. It won't stop them being factors in the decision-making. |
The truth will be revealed when the systemd stage3 and its surrounding documentation are there; that makes those factors uncertain, whereas the user need is a factor we can be certain of.
| steveL wrote: | | Quote: | | This is something I think Gentoo should work towards; |
Yes your agenda of "pushing Gentoo forward". Unfortunately the reasoning is often flawed, afaic, so I won't be following that agenda. IMO it's just "shiny, shiny" and we've dealt with that lots of times in Gentoo; it's antarus' expression, ask him to explain it to you if you like. |
The revelation is that others are working on this, as we're talking on the basis of a perception; as it is their work, whether this is shiny as knight armor will depend on their agenda.
| steveL wrote: | | That's just typical pretext afaic. What you talk about is already being worked on, but it could never be recommended as what people download for their first install. |
It can be, as it's just one of multiple options; consider something like "for experienced users that want a minimal install without all the bells and whistles", not exactly that but you get the idea.
| steveL wrote: | | Quote: | | To base this on more actual data; grepping case insensitive for "OpenRC" and "init" through all Council meeting logs and summaries, it has never been brought up as a default, as favored or something along those lines. |
That's not real data at all. |
It is real data.
| steveL wrote: | | It's just mock-statistics imo (I specialised in Probability and Statistics) and you're presenting that to assert "it's never been considered a default" |
An assertion needs involvement of probability to be considered statistics.
| steveL wrote: | | as if it gives weight or precedence to your argument, which is essentially that we need a systemd stage, nothing else. |
It is put in the context of there being no default.
| steveL wrote: | | You're then trying to conflate that into some sort of "forward direction" of no default, presenting it as "good for everyone" bringing in Olde-Fashioned Gentooee as something you care about, when in fact it is a total and utter rejection of that upstream. |
If things get categorized, yes; however, it is possible to stay uncategorized.
| steveL wrote: | | We don't need any such thing |
Some users do need such thing.
| steveL wrote: | | since it's easy to set your profile (which you have to do anyway) and emerge what you need from the stage3 releng already provides. And it's bad software engineering not to have a stage3 that must be working at all times, from which you can install any setup you like without major inconvenience. It'd be awful for Gentoo afaic. |
Yes, that is and/or could become possible regardless of the stage3 choice. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TomWij
Retired Dev
Joined: 04 Jul 2012
Posts: 1553
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2014 4:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| khayyam wrote: | | TomWij wrote: | | If you think this through; in the short term OpenRC continues to act as default, but long term it will feel as that the concept of a default will fade away. This is something I think Gentoo should work towards [...] |
TomWij ... this might be a good time to also introduce tags to user profiles on the forum (and elsewhere one would hope) which identify which init system is in use. |
Maybe `emerge --info` could be used on the forums; under that condition, this could be easily made possible by listing which init system is used. That would be useful for bug reports that depend on the init system too.
That is the Gentoo Base System project; even under the assumption that this page is the Gentoo project, you'll note that this page describes an aim and/or attempt which leaves for freedom in which extent it is done.
| krinn wrote: | | Also don't try to tag Gentoo stage3 "Old Fashion"... |
Given Neddy's advertisement across the forums, indeed; yes, "Old Fashion"... is something else.
| krinn wrote: | | Only other project respecting Gentoo Base Project may challenge that default. |
Other projects can take a shared first place, given peace is more appreciated than war; the aim and/or attempt is quite specific, yet different from obtaining fame and fortune.
| 666threesixes666 wrote: | | tomwij you sir are my hero. why start with openrc stage when you know you're installing gnome just to rip out openrc? id like to see a busybox, & runit stage3s also. choice from the ground level on up sounds good to me. |
Indeed; why migrate an entire init system, including the base configuration and services, when you can start right from the right init system for you. Migration should be an exception for when you need it, eg. running an OpenRC system for a long time; it shouldn't be the rule, eg. installing an OpenRC system when you need a systemd system. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steveL
Watchman
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2014 4:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| @TomWij: you're at it again, afaic, so I'm out, I don't have time to play chase-the-tail with you. Suffice to say I think your post, as so many times in the past, is simply you in love with the sound of your own thoughts. Please don't respond directly to my posts again. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
steveL
Watchman
Joined: 13 Sep 2006
Posts: 5153
Location: The Peanut Gallery
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2014 4:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 666threesixes666 wrote: | | why start with openrc stage when you know you're installing gnome just to rip out openrc? |
Lul, yeah because openrc brings in SO many dependencies that removing it is SO painful, and it installs loads of other things all over the filesystem.. oh wait. that's systemd.
FTR as I stated before I don't have any issue with a systemd stage3, except when people start to presume that it means some sort of move toward it as a default. Systemd fanatics have a habit of using "supported" to mean "selected", or to try and twist words and meaning around til everyone's confused so they numbly take the kool-aid, and frankly it's tiresome, as well as exploitative, imo. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anon-E-moose
Watchman
Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 6097
Location: Dallas area
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2014 5:06 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 666threesixes666 wrote: | | why start with openrc stage when you know you're installing gnome just to rip out openrc? |
I think every person out there running systemd should immediately remove all traces of openrc from their systems, then reboot into a clean systemd. 
_________________
PRIME x570-pro, 3700x, 6.1 zen kernel
gcc 13, profile 17.0 (custom bare multilib), openrc, wayland |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ulenrich
Veteran
Joined: 10 Oct 2010
Posts: 1480
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2014 5:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think it is not in any case very meaningful in a deep sense if there is a systemd-stage3 or not:
As portage can purge all files in a clean way it is possible to transition a system in any desired state by a(n experienced) user.
What baffles me more: The Linux system is diverse more and more in a way a normal users cannot have all the expertise to know what sets of USE flags play well together. Every now and then a user posts in the forum: "Systemd was pulled on my system and I didn't want" You can then respond: Gentoo is a meta distribution, look out, don't whine.
But the same issue is with Mesa-Opengl USE flags, or the whole bunch of audio related things. What if we manage to have some better profiles, some which represent more deep expertise. Some profiles that enable newbie users to make enlightened decissions? Funtoo shows a way this direction I feel would enable users better.
Currently profiles are handled in a recursive way only Gentoo developers can handle. Portage has all means to make much more possible. But this is hidden now. Gentoo, please enable experienced users to utilize profiles to guide the newbies!
Down with all of recursive profiles! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
khayyam
Watchman
Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 6227
Location: Room 101
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2014 7:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TomWij wrote: | | khayyam wrote: | | ... this might be a good time to also introduce tags to user profiles on the forum (and elsewhere one would hope) which identify which init system is in use. |
Maybe `emerge --info` could be used on the forums; under that condition, this could be easily made possible by listing which init system is used. That would be useful for bug reports that depend on the init system too. |
TomWij ... what I had in mind was more along the lines of a flashing neon thingy included as part of "Joined", "Posts", etc, which reads "Standard Base System" or "Obsolete Fuddy-Duddy" dependent on which init system is in use ... but nevermind, if I omit to state clearly at which point I'm engaging in satire and at which point I'm expressing my current frustrations, etc, what am I to expect.
best ... khay |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TomWij
Retired Dev
Joined: 04 Jul 2012
Posts: 1553
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2014 7:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| steveL wrote: | | @TomWij: you're at it again, afaic, so I'm out, I don't have time to play chase-the-tail with you. |
Chase-the-tail one decides to play; two sides give a viewpoint which is where the discussion is sufficiently constructive, playing chase-the-tail beyond that results in a discussion loop.
| steveL wrote: | | Suffice to say I think your post, as so many times in the past, is simply you in love with the sound of your own thoughts. |
Both our posts can be perceived in such way, that's a characteristic of early constructive discussion. It becomes resounding with the presence of chase-the-tail constructs and meta talk beyond the discussion itself.
| steveL wrote: | | Please don't respond directly to my posts again. |
Categorization is what is to be avoided; and thus, responses are made where they are due. They target the general public as this is a discussion that is to be read by a larger amount of users that come along.
| steveL wrote: | | Lul, yeah because openrc brings in SO many dependencies that removing it is SO painful, and it installs loads of other things all over the filesystem.. oh wait. that's systemd. |
It does bring in reverse dependencies; one such is the @system set which recent resolution of the functions.sh bug will resolve, we've also several bugs with unnecessary dependencies on sys-apps/openrc fixed.
| steveL wrote: | | FTR as I stated before I don't have any issue with a systemd stage3, except when people start to presume that it means some sort of move toward it as a default. Systemd fanatics have a habit of using "supported" to mean "selected", or to try and twist words and meaning around til everyone's confused so they numbly take the kool-aid, and frankly it's tiresome, as well as exploitative, imo. |
Consider this indirect misrepresenting response that was made after that request; if one were to follow that request, it would allow people to follow this. However, earlier posts clarify that the presumption is to move away from what is described in this response; one such way is to move away from the concept of having a default, a longer time ago in this discussion it has been expressed that a change in default is far away.
| khayyam wrote: | | TomWij ... what I had in mind was more along the lines of a flashing neon thingy included as part of "Joined", "Posts", etc, which reads "Standard Base System" or "Obsolete Fuddy-Duddy" dependent on which init system is in use ... but nevermind, if I omit to state clearly at which point I'm engaging in satire and at which point I'm expressing my current frustrations, etc, what am I to expect. |
Request this in the forum feedback forum, as this is their terrain; the `emerge --info` was suggested as that can be easier to implement and be a more generic approach (as it improves bug reports as well).
| ulenrich wrote: | I think it is not in any case very meaningful in a deep sense if there is a systemd-stage3 or not:
As portage can purge all files in a clean way it is possible to transition a system in any desired state by a(n experienced) user. |
Configuration is outside this scope; inside the scope, it can become tricky with things like blockers, profile, rebuilds, slot conflicts and more complexities along those lines.
| ulenrich wrote: | | But the same issue is with Mesa-Opengl USE flags, or the whole bunch of audio related things. |
The opposite can be experienced too; let's for example look at media-video/vlc which has +qt4 by default, however, it still happens people end up with media-video/vlc set with -qt4 and end up without a GUI and perceive it as crashing. Crashing here means that no GUI shows up; though, in reality it is functional in a CLI style way for doing things like reco(r)ding. It requires one to pay attention to the USE flags presented; and for obtaining things like a GUI, they need to be aware which graphical toolkits exist. With such knowledge at hand checking whether it is still at its default +qt4 (while disabling it maybe globally in make.conf) becomes a breeze.
With a recent gtk* discussion some thoughts have come up about maybe simplifying this by using a more global USE="gui"; whether that will be done, and how it is to be implemented, is yet to be prototyped, inspected and discussed.
| ulenrich wrote: | What if we manage to have some better profiles, some which represent more deep expertise. Some profiles that enable newbie users to make enlightened decissions? Funtoo shows a way this direction I feel would enable users better.
Currently profiles are handled in a recursive way only Gentoo developers can handle. Portage has all means to make much more possible. But this is hidden now. Gentoo, please enable experienced users to utilize profiles to guide the newbies!
Down with all of recursive profiles! |
Yes, Funtoo's mixins are indeed interesting; given that extra profiles are rarely made due to that complexity, as well as that the complexity increases a bit as profiles get added, I think that maybe Gentoo might work itself that way such that they will have to switch to this system. At this point this feels like "time will tell"; that is, until people get verbal about this that they want this. A forum poll and a gentoo-user ML poll can do wonders; if someone is interested in pushing this through by making such polls and presenting their results, make sure to document both sides properly for a fair choice. Capturing feedback in the discussion itself can be helpful for identifying how things are used or what's right or wrong with a particular choice. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
khayyam
Watchman
Joined: 07 Jun 2012
Posts: 6227
Location: Room 101
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2014 8:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| TomWij wrote: | | steveL wrote: | | @TomWij: you're at it again, afaic, so I'm out, I don't have time to play chase-the-tail with you. |
Chase-the-tail one decides to play; two sides give a viewpoint which is where the discussion is sufficiently constructive, playing chase-the-tail beyond that results in a discussion loop. |
TomWij ... not all cats have tails, those that don't often chase the tails of those that do ... just to provide an example of what I think steve means.
| TomWij wrote: | | khayyam wrote: | | TomWij ... what I had in mind was more along the lines of a flashing neon thingy included as part of "Joined", "Posts", etc, which reads "Standard Base System" or "Obsolete Fuddy-Duddy" dependent on which init system is in use ... but nevermind, if I omit to state clearly at which point I'm engaging in satire and at which point I'm expressing my current frustrations, etc, what am I to expect. |
Request this in the forum feedback forum, as this is their terrain; the `emerge --info` was suggested as that can be easier to implement and be a more generic approach (as it improves bug reports as well). |
I'm tempted to read that as a humorious rejoinder but no matter how hard I try I can't make it stick. Sometimes, people speak past each other ... in this case your response reveals that you weren't really listening to what I had to say ... hasn't this also come up in the past?
best ... khay |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 54217
Location: 56N 3W
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2014 8:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I can sense this thread going bad.
Please - no more post here for 24 hours
_________________
Regards,
NeddySeagoon
Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anon-E-moose
Watchman
Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 6097
Location: Dallas area
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2014 8:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Perhaps locking it for a day or two would be good.
If it is going to be permanently locked then I would ask for the openrc/monit posts
from several pages back to be put into another thread.
I was going to PM you Neddy but opted for keeping it in the open.
_________________
PRIME x570-pro, 3700x, 6.1 zen kernel
gcc 13, profile 17.0 (custom bare multilib), openrc, wayland |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
NeddySeagoon
Administrator
Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Posts: 54217
Location: 56N 3W
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 18, 2014 8:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Anon-E-moose,
I would like to think the community can mostly police itself, with mods and admins stepping in to curb the worst excesses only ocasionally.
A public request for a pause is the bottom end of mod intervention.
I did give some thought to a 24 hour lock but that only encourages new threads.
No more posts for 24 hours please.
_________________
Regards,
NeddySeagoon
Computer users fall into two groups:-
those that do backups
those that have never had a hard drive fail. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
TomWij
Retired Dev
Joined: 04 Jul 2012
Posts: 1553
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 20, 2014 9:17 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hello everyone.
This is a delayed response, per the 24h waiting time above; adjusted to reflect the most recent discussion, that continued to happen elsewhere.
| khayyam wrote: |
TomWij ... not all cats have tails, those that don't often chase the tails of those that do ... just to provide an example of what I think steve means.
I'm tempted to read that as a humorious rejoinder but no matter how hard I try I can't make it stick. Sometimes, people speak past each other ... in this case your response reveals that you weren't really listening to what I had to say ... hasn't this also come up in the past? |
The meaning of his and your recent posts, as well as the fun brought forward as part of that, have little to do with the context of the on-topic discussion around it; per consequence, the both of you need to be aware that a lot of people, including me, choose not to listen to that (and other things, your posts are just one example) as it is irrelevant to what they expect when they browse to this thread. Instead, we make responses intended to bring the thread back on-topic; both by short-cutting what was said, reiterating what is on-topic and even by asking you to ask your request in the right place outside of this topic (forum tags? --> forum feedback.). Other people simply lose the interest when it continues to be off-topic; similar to like how I have now decided to (as this is my last post for some weeks or months to come), but this response was due regardless of that and therefore I want to ask something of at least of the both of you one last time in favor of the rest of the community:
Can you now get back on-topic instead of continuing the off-topic and/or meta talk here and elsewhere?
This applies to everyone, including me; as you can see, this request is in itself off-topic and/or meta talk but it has the means to put an end to it. Thank you very much.
PS: The latest posts from mv and ulenrich on this last page are a good example of what is still on-topic, ignoring the religion part; especially since they may be on opposing sides, it is quite remarkable.
PS2: In the posts below, a similar conclusion is made; consider here how "those who seek" and "there will always be a few" could apply to the both of us, but neither of us necessarily intends to (unless one does).
Last edited by TomWij on Thu Mar 20, 2014 9:47 am; edited 5 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Anon-E-moose
Watchman
Joined: 23 May 2008
Posts: 6097
Location: Dallas area
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 20, 2014 9:33 am Post subject: |
|
|
For those who wish to continue discussing whatever they want here.
A word of advice, simply post around those who only want to cause this thread to be locked
and those who seek to control the direction of this discussion even though they aren't admins/mods.
Now, back to your regularly scheduled program.
Have fun.
_________________
PRIME x570-pro, 3700x, 6.1 zen kernel
gcc 13, profile 17.0 (custom bare multilib), openrc, wayland |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
Other Things Gentoo
