On Mon, 2021-08-23 at 16:36 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > > > > > On Mon, 23 Aug 2021, Anthony G Basile wrote: > > > > > **WARNING** > > > > > > > > If you happen to have an INSTALL_MASK with a blanket "*systemd*" > > > > glob, you will inevitably break your system. sys-fs/udev > > > > contains > > > > "systemd" in some of its filenames, hence a blanket filter rule > > > > will > > > > likely lead to a non-functional udev installation. > > > > > > Will an INSTALL_MASK of "/usr/lib/systemd /etc/systemd" cause any > > > issues? > > > I have not tested, but I think so since "systemd-" is used as a > > prefix > > for files installed by sys-fs/udev. > > So, we've abandoned the systemd USE flag, and I remember that one of > the arguments was that users could use INSTALL_MASK for precisely the > above mentioned directories. > > Now the message is that users' systems will be broken if they had > followed our previous advice? Seriously? > > Ulrich
Let assume the counterfactual for a moment here: We retained the USE=systemd flag for all unit files and what not, so people can cleanse themselves of the systemd units etc. without resorting to INSTALL_MASK. How would USE=-systemd have prevented this situation? USE=-systemd would randomly mv and sed random files so the "systemd-" prefix doesn't show up?
