<farkuhar>
The TODO38 wiki page wasn't the only input that beerman might have interpreted as permission to radically overhaul the rc scripts. darfo also opened that Gitea issue about the fail2ban script in /etc/rc.d, and once beerman started tinkering there, it was not too big a leap to overhaul /etc/rc itself.
<farkuhar>
Some statistics: Of the opt ports that have /etc/rc.d in their footprints, 24 are maintained by jue, 1 by beerman, and 5 by jaeger. Of the contrib ports that have /etc/rc.d in their footprints, 32 are maintained by beerman, 1 by jue, and 8 by jaeger.
<farkuhar>
None of the core ports with /etc/rc.d in their footprints have a specific individual listed as Maintainer, they're all claimed by "CRUX System Team".
<SiFuh_>
farkuhar: By the way OpenBSD 7.7 was released.
<farkuhar>
SiFuh_: Yeah, I saw the announcement.
<SiFuh_>
farkuhar: Lip reading/
<SiFuh_>
?
<farkuhar>
I'm flattered that SiFuh thinks I would make a good enough impression, contacting Per Liden and asking for his opinion on whether the current CRUX is living up to his ideals. But surely there has to be someone with longer involvement in the project, who could persuade Per to speak up on the current state of affairs.
<farkuhar>
If the devs no longer want to use IRC to field the questions and concerns of long-time users, then at least as a courtesy they could state their preferred mode of communication (Gitea issues, mailing list, ...). It's inexcusable to allow so many days to elapse with no respose to SiFuh's criticism of the /etc/rc abomination.
<SiFuh_>
It is inexcusable to blindy let an inexperienced individual to mess around with your system's core init script.
<farkuhar>
Does anyone remember which CRUX release was the last one that Per directly involved himself in? The only reference point that comes to mind is mid-2006, when the mailing list featured comments such as "taking over the project after Per's departure".
<SiFuh_>
No, but I know he was still there long after but not doing anything
<remiliascarlet>
I think that if Beerman stays at CRUX forever, we'd eventually see CRUX getting a Calamaris installer, SystemD init system, Flatpak package manager by default, and other modern Linux bullshit, turning it into yet another generic Linux distro.
<remiliascarlet>
Current CRUX's unique selling point is the BSD-style init system and the ports collection, which at least makes it stand out from the other Linux distro's.
<remiliascarlet>
But as soon as CRUX gets completely "modernized", people will look at it and be like "What does CRUX have to offer what other distro's don't? Nothing? Well, I guess I'll just stick with Ubuntu then.".
<farkuhar>
Something darfo wrote has been echoing in my mind lately: "If they [the core team] ain't having fun with CRUX they should, as a group, shrink the work as they see fit." It would seem that shrinking the work means blindly adopting the packaging decisions of more mainstream distos, which reduces the amount of patching they would otherwise be doing to ensure compatibility with a pam-free systemd-free distro.
<farkuhar>
If I'm reading darfo correctly, he would dispute the existence of any eternal set of principles governing how the distro should be put together. Instead, CRUX is whatever the current core team feels like packaging.
<SiFuh_>
I think he means that being overloaded and inundated with so many ports to keep track of, then they shouldn't be stressing out over those ports and should lighten the load by stripping out the shit not commonly needed.
<SiFuh_>
Focusing on keeping core and opt uptodate is the key motive. As for contrib, it shouldn't be considered as a must but rather a gift to have but not neccessarily uptodate.
<farkuhar>
SiFuh_: I wish that was what darfo meant. The more cynical interpretation is that they now find it easier to adopt mainstream technologies like flatpak and systemd, rather than fighting against bloat that is being introduced upstream.
<SiFuh_>
Yeah, well that sounds like an anti-crux assumption
<farkuhar>
What was the original CRUX? A stripped-down collection of core ports selected and built by Per, offered up to the world in the form of binary packages. Soon the users started expecting to build the ports themselves, and that's when pkgmk and the ports collections made their debut. But before that, the distro actually was "whatever the core team [Per] felt like packaging".
<SiFuh_>
No, it was a 100% pure minimalist core. If it wasn't needed to run, it wasn't allowed in core.
<SiFuh_>
I have been preaching that for a very long time. You should have figured it out by now.
<farkuhar>
Yes, it was 100% pure minimalist because that's the guiding principle that Per followed. Once he handed over the reins to a new core team, another set of guiding principles was allowed to take root.
<SiFuh_>
Actually only recently
<SiFuh_>
Like in the last few years.
<SiFuh_>
I think it is because they got lazy and the workload became too big for them
<SiFuh_>
And when Romster took leave, they needed to find a suitable replacement and took in that current twat who thinks he owns it now
<SiFuh_>
farkuhar: and everyone else who knows that rc is broken, now is the time to comment in #CRUX about it. The door is open
<SiFuh_>
I'd prefer beerman fix it himself.
<SiFuh_>
If not, I will provide the patch this month
<SiFuh_>
Okay next month. April almost ending.
SiFuh_ has quit [Remote host closed the connection]
SiFuh_ has joined #crux-musl
zorz_ has joined #crux-musl
zorz_ has quit [Quit: leaving]
mpark has joined #crux-musl
<farkuhar>
mpark: Welcome! Glad you could join us.
<farkuhar>
SiFuh_ opened the door for us to comment on the new /etc/rc, but before submitting a patch I would like to know where this file came from. https://d.uguu.se/ugQBrgEc.sh
<farkuhar>
It was sitting in an old directory that I last touched three months ago, and it appears to be an expansion of the unmounting logic in /etc/rc.shutdown. I don't remember writing any of that code myself. Does anybody recognize the source?