Add init script (sysv) support for busybox's ntpd
PATCH 1/1 Add init script (sysv) support for busybox's ntpd
--- meta/recipes-core/busybox/busybox.inc | 10 ++++-- meta/recipes-core/busybox/busybox_1.22.1.bb | 2 ++ meta/recipes-core/busybox/files/busybox-ntpd | 39 +++++++++++++++++++++++ meta/recipes-core/busybox/files/busybox-ntpd.conf | 1 + 4 files changed, 50 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) create mode 100644 meta/recipes-core/busybox/files/busybox-ntpd create mode 100644 meta/recipes-core/busybox/files/busybox-ntpd.conf
meta/recipes-core/busybox/busybox.inc +8 -2
@@ -18,7 +18,7 @@ BUSYBOX_SPLIT_SUID ?= "1" export EXTRA_CFLAGS = "${CFLAGS}" export EXTRA_LDFLAGS = "${LDFLAGS}" -PACKAGES =+ "${PN}-httpd ${PN}-udhcpd ${PN}-udhcpc ${PN}-syslog ${PN}-mdev ${PN}-hwclock" +PACKAGES =+ "${PN}-httpd ${PN}-udhcpd ${PN}-udhcpc ${PN}-syslog ${PN}-mdev ${PN}-hwclock ${PN}-ntpd" FILES_${PN}-httpd = "${sysconfdir}/init.d/busybox-httpd /srv/www" FILES_${PN}-syslog = "${sysconfdir}/init.d/syslog* ${sysconfdir}/syslog-startup.conf* ${sysconfdir}/syslog.conf* ${systemd_unitdir}/system/syslog.service ${sysconfdir}/default/busybox-syslog"
@@ -26,8 +26,9 @@ FILES_${PN}-mdev = "${sysconfdir}/init.d/mdev ${sysconfdir}/mdev.conf" FILES_${PN}-udhcpd = "${sysconfdir}/init.d/busybox-udhcpd" FILES_${PN}-udhcpc = "${sysconfdir}/udhcpc.d ${datadir}/udhcpc" FILES_${PN}-hwclock = "${sysconfdir}/init.d/hwclock.sh" +FILES_${PN}-ntpd = "${sysconfdir}/init.d/busybox-ntpd ${sysconfdir}/busybox-ntpd.conf" -INITSCRIPT_PACKAGES = "${PN}-httpd ${PN}-syslog ${PN}-udhcpd ${PN}-mdev ${PN}-hwclock" +INITSCRIPT_PACKAGES = "${PN}-httpd ${PN}-syslog ${PN}-udhcpd ${PN}-mdev ${PN}-hwclock ${PN}-ntpd" INITSCRIPT_NAME_${PN}-httpd = "busybox-httpd" INITSCRIPT_NAME_${PN}-hwclock = "hwclock.sh"
@@ -35,6 +36,7 @@ INITSCRIPT_NAME_${PN}-mdev = "mdev" INITSCRIPT_PARAMS_${PN}-mdev = "start 03 S ." INITSCRIPT_NAME_${PN}-syslog = "syslog" INITSCRIPT_NAME_${PN}-udhcpd = "busybox-udhcpd" +INITSCRIPT_NAME_${PN}-ntpd = "busybox-ntpd" SYSTEMD_PACKAGES = "${PN}-syslog" SYSTEMD_SERVICE_${PN}-syslog = "busybox-syslog.service"
@@ -264,6 +266,10 @@ do_install () { install -m 644 ${WORKDIR}/mdev.conf ${D}${sysconfdir}/mdev.conf fi fi + if grep "CONFIG_NTPD=y" ${B}/.config; then + install -m 0755 ${WORKDIR}/busybox-ntpd ${D}${sysconfdir}/init.d/ + install -m 0644 ${WORKDIR}/busybox-ntpd.conf ${D}${sysconfdir}/ + fi if ${@base_contains('DISTRO_FEATURES','systemd','true','false',d)}; then install -d ${D}${systemd_unitdir}/system
meta/recipes-core/busybox/busybox_1.22.1.bb +2 -0
@@ -27,6 +27,8 @@ SRC_URI = "http://www.busybox.net/downloads/busybox-${PV}.tar.bz2;name=tarball \ file://inetd.conf \ file://inetd \ file://login-utilities.cfg \ + file://busybox-ntpd \ + file://busybox-ntpd.conf \ " SRC_URI[tarball.md5sum] = "337d1a15ab1cb1d4ed423168b1eb7d7e"
meta/recipes-core/busybox/files/busybox-ntpd new file +39 -0
@@ -0,0 +1,39 @@ +#!/bin/sh +DAEMON=/sbin/ntpd +NAME=ntpd +DESC="Busybox NTP Daemon" +source /etc/busybox-ntpd.conf +ARGS="-p $PEER" + +test -f $DAEMON || exit 0 + +set -e + +case "$1" in + start) + start-stop-daemon -S -b -n $NAME -a $DAEMON -- $ARGS + echo "done." + ;; + stop) + echo -n "stopping $DESC: $NAME... " + start-stop-daemon -K -n $NAME + echo "done." + ;; + restart) + echo "restarting $DESC: $NAME... " + $0 stop + $0 start + echo "done." + ;; + reload) + echo -n "reloading $DESC: $NAME... " + killall -HUP $(basename ${DAEMON}) + echo "done." + ;; + *) + echo "Usage: $0 {start|stop|restart|reload}" + exit 1 + ;; +esac + +exit 0
meta/recipes-core/busybox/files/busybox-ntpd.conf new file +1 -0
@@ -0,0 +1 @@ +PEER=127.0.0.1
Signature · 1 line
1.9.0
Quoted 1 line · Laszlo Papp
+PEER=127.0.0.1
That doesn't seem like a very useful default. We also can't use the NTP pool by default, so this should copy the behaviour of the ntpd package in meta-networking and default to no peers, and not start if none are specified.
Ross
Op 20 mrt. 2014, om 11:45 heeft Burton, Ross <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 7 lines · Laszlo Papp
Quoted 1 line
+PEER=127.0.0.1
That doesn't seem like a very useful default. We also can't use the NTP pool by default, so this should copy the behaviour of the ntpd package in meta-networking and default to no peers, and not start if none are specified.
And the initscript is missing LSB headers.
Quoted 4 lines · Koen Kooi
Op 20 mrt. 2014, om 11:45 heeft Burton, Ross <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 1 line · Laszlo Papp
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 1 line
+PEER=127.0.0.1
That doesn't seem like a very useful default. We also can't use the NTP pool by default, so this should copy the behaviour of the ntpd package in meta-networking and default to no peers, and not start if none are specified.
And the initscript is missing LSB headers.
Just like the other similar scripts.
Quoted 7 lines · Laszlo Papp
Quoted 6 lines · Koen Kooi
Op 20 mrt. 2014, om 11:45 heeft Burton, Ross <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 3 lines · Laszlo Papp
Quoted 1 line
+PEER=127.0.0.1
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 4 lines
That doesn't seem like a very useful default. We also can't use the NTP pool by default, so this should copy the behaviour of the ntpd package in meta-networking and default to no peers, and not start if none are specified.
And the initscript is missing LSB headers.
Just like the other similar scripts.
This does not mean we ought to make the problem worse so add it for new ones. If you are in good mood, send a fix for the others too ;)
Signature · 3 lines
Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems http://www.ossystems.com.br http://code.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854 Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750
Quoted 13 lines · Otavio Salvador
Quoted 12 lines · Laszlo Papp
Quoted 11 lines · Koen Kooi
Op 20 mrt. 2014, om 11:45 heeft Burton, Ross <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 7 lines · Laszlo Papp
Quoted 1 line
+PEER=127.0.0.1
That doesn't seem like a very useful default. We also can't use the NTP pool by default, so this should copy the behaviour of the ntpd package in meta-networking and default to no peers, and not start if none are specified.
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 1 line
And the initscript is missing LSB headers.
Just like the other similar scripts.
This does not mean we ought to make the problem worse so add it for new ones. If you are in good mood, send a fix for the others too ;)
I do not think this is a problem. Could you please point out what functionality it breaks? Send patches for the others, and I will make this cosmetic change for this one, too. Consistency is more important than a mess of different styles, especially when it comes to cosmetic changes like this.
That said, Ross had a good point - although that is not critical either, and since everyone is overriding the default, it could work without that - , so I will update that one.
Quoted 19 lines · Laszlo Papp
Quoted 17 lines · Otavio Salvador
Quoted 15 lines · Laszlo Papp
Quoted 4 lines · Koen Kooi
Op 20 mrt. 2014, om 11:45 heeft Burton, Ross <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 1 line · Laszlo Papp
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 1 line
+PEER=127.0.0.1
That doesn't seem like a very useful default. We also can't use the NTP pool by default, so this should copy the behaviour of the ntpd package in meta-networking and default to no peers, and not start if none are specified.
And the initscript is missing LSB headers.
Just like the other similar scripts.
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 2 lines
This does not mean we ought to make the problem worse so add it for new ones. If you are in good mood, send a fix for the others too ;)
I do not think this is a problem. Could you please point out what functionality it breaks? Send patches for the others, and I will make this cosmetic change for this one, too. Consistency is more important than a mess of different styles, especially when it comes to cosmetic changes like this.
Koen and I think it is important. So consider this my NACK for the patch as is.
You are free to do whatever you want.
Quoted 3 lines
That said, Ross had a good point - although that is not critical either, and since everyone is overriding the default, it could work without that - , so I will update that one.
Better.
Signature · 3 lines
Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems http://www.ossystems.com.br http://code.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854 Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750
Quoted 23 lines · Otavio Salvador
Quoted 22 lines · Laszlo Papp
Quoted 19 lines · Otavio Salvador
Quoted 7 lines · Laszlo Papp
Quoted 6 lines · Koen Kooi
Op 20 mrt. 2014, om 11:45 heeft Burton, Ross <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 3 lines · Laszlo Papp
Quoted 1 line
+PEER=127.0.0.1
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 4 lines
That doesn't seem like a very useful default. We also can't use the NTP pool by default, so this should copy the behaviour of the ntpd package in meta-networking and default to no peers, and not start if none are specified.
And the initscript is missing LSB headers.
Just like the other similar scripts.
This does not mean we ought to make the problem worse so add it for new ones. If you are in good mood, send a fix for the others too ;)
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 5 lines
I do not think this is a problem. Could you please point out what functionality it breaks? Send patches for the others, and I will make this cosmetic change for this one, too. Consistency is more important than a mess of different styles, especially when it comes to cosmetic changes like this.
Koen and I think it is important. So consider this my NACK for the patch as is.
You are free to NACK without an explanation why it is important, but do not expect it to weigh much that way, at least in my eyes, based on that you are not even a maintainer as far as I know.
I also think that it is not constructive to give NACK without answering the questions, and only telling again "It is important". Please be more constructive and explain the real issue. That is a better way of convincing a contributor than telling the person it is bad what you are doing because it is bad.
There was someone today publishing a blog post how important it is to become pragmatic to get things done. Currently, cosmetic changes are just in the way of getting things done. The feature shall be more important than cosmetic changes. I saw this frightening away contributors, and features actually not getting into projects.
That being said, if you can explain your reasoning, and I find it reasonable and worthy, I will update it.
Quoted 3 lines · Laszlo Papp
You are free to NACK without an explanation why it is important, but do not expect it to weigh much that way, at least in my eyes, based on that you are not even a maintainer as far as I know.
One good reason: systemd reads the LSB headers.
Ross
Op 20 mrt. 2014, om 14:28 heeft Burton, Ross <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 6 lines · Laszlo Papp
Quoted 3 lines
You are free to NACK without an explanation why it is important, but do not expect it to weigh much that way, at least in my eyes, based on that you are not even a maintainer as far as I know.
One good reason: systemd reads the LSB headers.
As well as other inits that support sysv mode.
regards,
Koen
Quoted 11 lines · Koen Kooi
Op 20 mrt. 2014, om 14:28 heeft Burton, Ross <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 6 lines · Laszlo Papp
Quoted 3 lines
You are free to NACK without an explanation why it is important, but do not expect it to weigh much that way, at least in my eyes, based on that you are not even a maintainer as far as I know.
One good reason: systemd reads the LSB headers.
As well as other inits that support sysv mode.
This init script is adding support for sysv and no more. This is also indicated in the first line of the commit message. I am sorry, but I will not test it systemd and with other systems. You are free to test it with everything in the world out there, and provide a more intelligent change and void my work.
This is what I call not pragmatic. It is not like incremental improvement is not useful because it does not do all the things in the world right away. This is clearly communicated in the commit message what it is for. For SysV, this is not any problem, it works fine.
No one has revealed a real issue with that so far as far as I can tell. So why block a feature that was meant for something just because someone cannot test on everything and/or does not want? What is being read here in my understand is, "everything or nothing". This is not pragmatic.
Please notice that perfection is the enemy of good. So my bottom line, feel free to reject this feature in favor of having nothing instead of something.
Unless someone can come up with a rebuttal that it is not working for the intended and documentation use case, I am not willing to change it, sorry. It would be pointless because I could not test it anyway, and I will not send blind changes like that.
Quoted 3 lines · Laszlo Papp
This init script is adding support for sysv and no more. This is also indicated in the first line of the commit message. I am sorry, but I will not test it systemd and with other systems
You're not being asked to test with systemd. You're being asked to add LSB-standard sysvinit-specific headers to a sysvinit script.
Ross
Quoted 7 lines · Ross
Quoted 3 lines · Laszlo Papp
This init script is adding support for sysv and no more. This is also indicated in the first line of the commit message. I am sorry, but I will not test it systemd and with other systems
You're not being asked to test with systemd. You're being asked to add LSB-standard sysvinit-specific headers to a sysvinit script.
In my understanding, people were referring to two issues:
1) not working with systemd and what not compat modes. This is not something I will test any soon.
2) It is not consistent, whereas if I take a look into busybox, the consistency is what I do, apparently.
I would like to quote from the Fedora wiki for instance:
"LSB Headers are not required for Fedora SysV-style initscripts, but they may be used. There is no requirement in the LSB certification for any system scripts to be LSB compliant, and it can cause issues with ordering."
So what is wrong about it without systemd and other compat modes? If it is that big a deal (i.e. blocker), perhaps it is better to document it in the contribution guideline as a generic trap.
Quoted 6 lines · Laszlo Papp
Quoted 5 lines · Ross
Quoted 3 lines · Laszlo Papp
This init script is adding support for sysv and no more. This is also indicated in the first line of the commit message. I am sorry, but I will not test it systemd and with other systems
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 2 lines
You're not being asked to test with systemd. You're being asked to add LSB-standard sysvinit-specific headers to a sysvinit script.
In my understanding, people were referring to two issues:
1) not working with systemd and what not compat modes. This is not something I will test any soon.
Other people already know it's causing the issues without LSB headers, so if you just add them, you don't need to test it with systemd, other people who care about systemd will do that for you or at least be OK with adding this script, because it will have LSB headers (so it should work fine in systemd world).
Quoted 18 lines
2) It is not consistent, whereas if I take a look into busybox, the consistency is what I do, apparently.
I would like to quote from the Fedora wiki for instance:
"LSB Headers are not required for Fedora SysV-style initscripts, but they may be used. There is no requirement in the LSB certification for any system scripts to be LSB compliant, and it can cause issues with ordering."
So what is wrong about it without systemd and other compat modes? If it is that big a deal (i.e. blocker), perhaps it is better to document it in the contribution guideline as a generic trap.
Signature · 4 lines
_______________________________________________ Openembedded-core mailing list [email protected] http://lists.openembedded.org/mailman/listinfo/openembedded-core
Signature · 1 line
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: [email protected]
Quoted 12 lines · Martin Jansa
Quoted 11 lines · Laszlo Papp
Quoted 7 lines · Ross
Quoted 3 lines · Laszlo Papp
This init script is adding support for sysv and no more. This is also indicated in the first line of the commit message. I am sorry, but I will not test it systemd and with other systems
You're not being asked to test with systemd. You're being asked to add LSB-standard sysvinit-specific headers to a sysvinit script.
In my understanding, people were referring to two issues:
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 2 lines
1) not working with systemd and what not compat modes. This is not something I will test any soon.
Other people already know it's causing the issues without LSB headers, so if you just add them, you don't need to test it with systemd, other people who care about systemd will do that for you or at least be OK with adding this script, because it will have LSB headers (so it should work fine in systemd world).
If someone is really interested in systemd, et al, unlike me at this point, I guess it is not a big deal to get an LSB header from someone to get it integrated into my change?
If no one cares about that, then why bother? So, if someone sends this to me I will integrate it, otherwise there is no point since that means no one cares.
But then again, this should not still block the change as it can be added incrementally. I am not sure if it is a good idea to block a feature because it does not provide another feature, too.
Any reason why this feature has never got in? It was submitted more than five months ago, and it would have added some feature to the system even if not _everything_ right from the beginning?
Quoted 36 lines · Laszlo Papp
Quoted 2 lines · Martin Jansa
Quoted 1 line · Laszlo Papp
On Thu, Mar 20, 2014 at 7:59 PM, Burton, Ross <[email protected]>
Quoted 10 lines · wrote:
Quoted 10 lines
Quoted 7 lines · Laszlo Papp
Quoted 3 lines
This init script is adding support for sysv and no more. This is also indicated in the first line of the commit message. I am sorry, but I will not test it systemd and with other systems
You're not being asked to test with systemd. You're being asked to add LSB-standard sysvinit-specific headers to a sysvinit script.
In my understanding, people were referring to two issues:
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 2 lines
1) not working with systemd and what not compat modes. This is not something I will test any soon.
Other people already know it's causing the issues without LSB headers, so if you just add them, you don't need to test it with systemd, other people who care about systemd will do that for you or at least be OK with adding this script, because it will have LSB headers (so it should work fine in systemd world).
If someone is really interested in systemd, et al, unlike me at this point, I guess it is not a big deal to get an LSB header from someone to get it integrated into my change?
If no one cares about that, then why bother? So, if someone sends this to me I will integrate it, otherwise there is no point since that means no one cares.
But then again, this should not still block the change as it can be added incrementally. I am not sure if it is a good idea to block a feature because it does not provide another feature, too.
I finally decided to get this patch another go, even though still no busybox daemon has LSB headers, but I would need to ask for some prime example of LSB headers that I can start off with. Could anyone please provide me a good example for that from the Yocto project? Thanks.
Quoted 45 lines · Laszlo Papp
Any reason why this feature has never got in? It was submitted more than five months ago, and it would have added some feature to the system even if not _everything_ right from the beginning?
Quoted 37 lines · Laszlo Papp
Quoted 14 lines · Martin Jansa
Quoted 13 lines · Laszlo Papp
Quoted 8 lines · Ross
Quoted 4 lines · Laszlo Papp
This init script is adding support for sysv and no more. This is also
indicated in the first line of the commit message. I am sorry, but I will not test it systemd and with other systemsYou're not being asked to test with systemd. You're being asked to add LSB-standard sysvinit-specific headers to a sysvinit script.
In my understanding, people were referring to two issues:
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 2 lines
1) not working with systemd and what not compat modes. This is not something I will test any soon.
Other people already know it's causing the issues without LSB headers, so if you just add them, you don't need to test it with systemd, other people who care about systemd will do that for you or at least be OK with adding this script, because it will have LSB headers (so it should work fine in systemd world).
If someone is really interested in systemd, et al, unlike me at this point, I guess it is not a big deal to get an LSB header from someone to get it integrated into my change?
If no one cares about that, then why bother? So, if someone sends this to me I will integrate it, otherwise there is no point since that means no one cares.
But then again, this should not still block the change as it can be added incrementally. I am not sure if it is a good idea to block a feature because it does not provide another feature, too.
Quoted 5 lines · Laszlo Papp
I finally decided to get this patch another go, even though still no busybox daemon has LSB headers, but I would need to ask for some prime example of LSB headers that I can start off with. Could anyone please provide me a good example for that from the Yocto project? Thanks.
What about:
### BEGIN INIT INFO
# Provides: ntpd # Required-Start: $network # Required-Stop: $network # Default-Start: 2 3 4 5 # Default-Stop: 0 1 6
# Short-Description: NTP daemon
# Description: Network Time Protocol (NTP) is a networking
# protocol for clock synchronization
### END INIT INFO
See
http://www.linuxbase.org/betaspecs/lsb/LSB-Core-generic/LSB-Core-generic/initscrcomconv.html
Signature · 3 lines
Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering http://free-electrons.com
Quoted 15 lines · Alexandre Belloni
Quoted 5 lines · Laszlo Papp
I finally decided to get this patch another go, even though still no busybox daemon has LSB headers, but I would need to ask for some prime example of LSB headers that I can start off with. Could anyone please provide me a good example for that from the Yocto project? Thanks.
What about:
### BEGIN INIT INFO
# Provides: ntpd # Required-Start: $network # Required-Stop: $network # Default-Start: 2 3 4 5 # Default-Stop: 0 1 6
Quoted 7 lines
# Short-Description: NTP daemon
# Description: Network Time Protocol (NTP) is a networking
# protocol for clock synchronization
### END INIT INFOSee
http://www.linuxbase.org/betaspecs/lsb/LSB-Core-generic/LSB-Core-generic/initscrcomconv.html
I forgot to mention that Martin Jansa gave me a good example yesterday. But thanks anyway. It is helpful.
Quoted 6 lines
--
Alexandre Belloni, Free Electrons
Embedded Linux, Kernel and Android engineering
http://free-electrons.com
Quoted 6 lines · Ross
Quoted 3 lines · Laszlo Papp
You are free to NACK without an explanation why it is important, but do not expect it to weigh much that way, at least in my eyes, based on that you are not even a maintainer as far as I know.
One good reason: systemd reads the LSB headers.
This init script is for SysV, not systemd.
Quoted 9 lines · Laszlo Papp
Quoted 6 lines · Ross
Quoted 3 lines · Laszlo Papp
You are free to NACK without an explanation why it is important, but do not expect it to weigh much that way, at least in my eyes, based on that you are not even a maintainer as far as I know.
One good reason: systemd reads the LSB headers.
This init script is for SysV, not systemd.
Laszlo, we made several valid points. The outcome is we don't want to have more init scripts lacking LSB headers. The desire to have this patch is yours so if you want to have our ack, address those remarks.
As I said, it is your call to handle it or not.
I am not the maintainer of OE-Core, so I don't have a final word on this (Richard does) but I made clear my point and my NACK for current status of the patch.
Signature · 3 lines
Otavio Salvador O.S. Systems http://www.ossystems.com.br http://code.ossystems.com.br Mobile: +55 (53) 9981-7854 Mobile: +1 (347) 903-9750
What is actually probably a bigger issue than the LSB, is that the conf is currently sourced. That means if it contains an "rm -rf /" statement, it will execute it.
Perhaps, this should be solved more gently...
Quoted 43 lines · Laszlo Papp
Quoted 23 lines · Otavio Salvador
Quoted 22 lines · Laszlo Papp
Quoted 19 lines · Otavio Salvador
Quoted 7 lines · Laszlo Papp
Quoted 6 lines · Koen Kooi
Op 20 mrt. 2014, om 11:45 heeft Burton, Ross <[email protected]> het volgende geschreven:
Quoted 3 lines · Laszlo Papp
Quoted 1 line
+PEER=127.0.0.1
Quoted 8 lines
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 4 lines
That doesn't seem like a very useful default. We also can't use the NTP pool by default, so this should copy the behaviour of the ntpd package in meta-networking and default to no peers, and not start if none are specified.
And the initscript is missing LSB headers.
Just like the other similar scripts.
This does not mean we ought to make the problem worse so add it for new ones. If you are in good mood, send a fix for the others too ;)
Quoted 7 lines
Quoted 5 lines
I do not think this is a problem. Could you please point out what functionality it breaks? Send patches for the others, and I will make this cosmetic change for this one, too. Consistency is more important than a mess of different styles, especially when it comes to cosmetic changes like this.
Koen and I think it is important. So consider this my NACK for the patch as is.
You are free to NACK without an explanation why it is important, but do not expect it to weigh much that way, at least in my eyes, based on that you are not even a maintainer as far as I know.
I also think that it is not constructive to give NACK without answering the questions, and only telling again "It is important". Please be more constructive and explain the real issue. That is a better way of convincing a contributor than telling the person it is bad what you are doing because it is bad.
Quoted 8 lines
There was someone today publishing a blog post how important it is to become pragmatic to get things done. Currently, cosmetic changes are just in the way of getting things done. The feature shall be more important than cosmetic changes. I saw this frightening away contributors, and features actually not getting into projects.
That being said, if you can explain your reasoning, and I find it reasonable and worthy, I will update it.
I don't remember the exact issue I was seeing in runtime with systemd and SysV scripts which were missing LSB headers, but it was handling them somehow different.
If you search meta-oe git log, then you'll find many commit messages where LSB headers were added when e.g. importing some older recipe from oe-classic, that's good enough reason to add them to new ntp script, isn't it?
Signature · 1 line
Martin 'JaMa' Jansa jabber: [email protected]
Quoted 9 lines · Laszlo Papp
Quoted 6 lines
Quoted 3 lines
Quoted 1 line
And the initscript is missing LSB headers.
Just like the other similar scripts.
This does not mean we ought to make the problem worse so add it for new ones. If you are in good mood, send a fix for the others too ;)
I do not think this is a problem. Could you please point out what functionality it breaks?
it would be not groked by systemd e.g. folks use sysvinit, systemd, upstart with OE
moreover we do have aspirations to come closer to lsb there are lsb images that some distros produce. There might be existing scripts which
dont have lsb headers however those are wrong examples to adhere to when generating brand
new scripts.
Send patches for the others, and I will make
Quoted 1 line
this cosmetic change for this one, too.
having said above why is that a condition for you to make your patch better ?
Consistency is more important
Quoted 2 lines
than a mess of different styles, especially when it comes to cosmetic changes like this.
lets say we are moving towards consistency one after another its not going to happen overnight
but each contribution in right direction helps.
Quoted 7 lines · Ross
Quoted 1 line · Laszlo Papp
+PEER=127.0.0.1
That doesn't seem like a very useful default. We also can't use the NTP pool by default, so this should copy the behaviour of the ntpd package in meta-networking and default to no peers, and not start if none are specified.
Yeah, some real timeserver could be put behind comments.