news item: changes to stages (make.conf and make.profile)
On Tue, 24 Jul 2012 08:48:52 +0000
Sven Vermeulen <swift@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Can current users also already use the /etc/portage location? If so,
> I can already update the docs now (since I'll need to describe both
> of the locations for a while anyhow).
I moved my make.conf to the new location about a year ago.
07-24-2012, 09:29 AM
Maxim Kammerer
news item: changes to stages (make.conf and make.profile)
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 3:07 AM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
<jmbsvicetto@gentoo.org> wrote:
> I propose to commit this news item in 2 or 3 days. Does anyone have
> any comments about it?
Several comments:
1. Maybe note that /etc/portage/make.conf takes precedence over /etc/make.conf?
2. New make.conf location (although supported) is not mentioned in
portage(5) man page for currently stable sys-apps/portage (2.1.10.65).
3. This news item is really useful, since the change has a potential
to break automated builds.
4. Are the other files / links in /etc also moving?
news item: changes to stages (make.conf and make.profile)
On 24 July 2012 08:07, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
<jmbsvicetto@gentoo.org> wrote:
Title: Changes on new stages
Author: Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto<jmbsvicetto@gentoo.org>
Content-Type: text/plain
Posted: 2012-07-27
Revision: 1
News-Item-Format: 1.0
Starting with catalyst 2.0.10, make.conf and make.profile will be
moved from /etc to /etc/postfix. Releng build boxes will be updated to
this catalyst version during the next few days. So I expect stages
built after July 30th to have make.conf and make.profile on /etc/portage.
I don't think you mean "from /etc to /etc/postfix" but "from /etc to
/etc/portage".
--
Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D.
Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened]
E-Mail : blueness@gentoo.org
GnuPG FP : 8040 5A4D 8709 21B1 1A88 33CE 979C AF40 D045 5535
GnuPG ID : D0455535
07-24-2012, 09:42 AM
Ralph Sennhauser
news item: changes to stages (make.conf and make.profile)
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 3:07 AM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
> <jmbsvicetto@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > I propose to commit this news item in 2 or 3 days. Does anyone have
> > any comments about it?
>
> Several comments:
>
> 1. Maybe note that /etc/portage/make.conf takes precedence
> over /etc/make.conf?
>
> 2. New make.conf location (although supported) is not mentioned in
> portage(5) man page for currently stable sys-apps/portage (2.1.10.65).
>
man 5 portage about files in /etc/portage
make.conf
The global custom settings for Portage. See make.conf(5). If
present, this file will over‐ ride settings from /etc/make.conf.
> 3. This news item is really useful, since the change has a potential
> to break automated builds.
We aren't discussing dropping support for the old locations here but
about makeing the new location the default.
07-24-2012, 10:04 AM
Maxim Kammerer
news item: changes to stages (make.conf and make.profile)
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 12:42 PM, Ralph Sennhauser <sera@gentoo.org> wrote:
> make.conf
> The global custom settings for Portage. See make.conf(5). If
> present, this file will over‐ ride settings from /etc/make.conf.
Thanks — missed it somehow.
> We aren't discussing dropping support for the old locations here but
> about makeing the new location the default.
My point is that if you copy make.conf to /etc automatically, an
/etc/portage/make.conf in stage3 will break the procedure because it
takes precedence.
news item: changes to stages (make.conf and make.profile)
>>>>> On Tue, 24 Jul 2012, Maxim Kammerer wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 3:07 AM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
> <jmbsvicetto@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> I propose to commit this news item in 2 or 3 days. Does anyone have
>> any comments about it?
> Several comments:
> 1. Maybe note that /etc/portage/make.conf takes precedence over
> /etc/make.conf?
Does it? With make.profile it seems to be the other way around, i.e.
/etc takes precedence over /etc/portage.
Ulrich
07-24-2012, 10:32 AM
Maxim Kammerer
news item: changes to stages (make.conf and make.profile)
On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 1:11 PM, Ulrich Mueller <ulm@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Does it? With make.profile it seems to be the other way around, i.e.
> /etc takes precedence over /etc/portage.
Well, at least this discrepancy is documented (portage(5)):
“[/etc/portage/]make.conf: […] If present, this file will override
settings from /etc/make.conf.”
“If both /etc/make.profile/ and /etc/portage/make.profile/ exist, then
/etc/make.profile/ will be preferred.”
(no mention of /etc/make.globals, though — perhaps it can be removed
from stage3)
news item: changes to stages (make.conf and make.profile)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 24-07-2012 00:07, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote:
> Hi.
>
> I propose to commit this news item in 2 or 3 days. Does anyone
> have any comments about it? The idea is to show this news item on
> all Gentoo systems. Is that even possible / desirable? I've talked
> with both the PR and Docs team before about this change. I'll try
> to help the docs team updating the handbook.
Taking into account the input in this thread, I've updated the
proposed news item.
Title: Changes on new stages
Author: Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto <jmbsvicetto@gentoo.org>
Content-Type: text/plain
Posted: 2012-07-27
Revision: 1
News-Item-Format: 1.0
Starting with catalyst 2.0.10, make.conf and make.profile will be
moved from /etc to /etc/portage. This is a change in the installation
defaults and since Portage will prefer make.conf under /etc/portage
over /etc, this is an heads-up for anyone doing new installs. If you
have a custom or automated method to install Gentoo, be sure to check
if its affected by this change.
Releng build boxes will be updated to this catalyst version during the
next few days. So I expect stages built after July 30th to have
make.conf and make.profile on /etc/portage.
Current users don't need to do anything. But if you want to follow the
preferred location, you may want to take the chance to move the files
in your system(s) to the new location.
- --
Regards,
Jorge Vicetto (jmbsvicetto) - jmbsvicetto at gentoo dot org
Gentoo- forums / Userrel / Devrel / KDE / Elections / RelEng
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.19 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
news item: changes to stages (make.conf and make.profile)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 24-07-2012 08:48, Sven Vermeulen wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 24, 2012 at 12:07:59AM +0000, Jorge Manuel B. S.
> Vicetto wrote:
>> I've talked with both the PR and Docs team before about this
>> change. I'll try to help the docs team updating the handbook.
>
> Speaking of which, will this also start the use of the SHA512 &
> WHIRLPOOL checksums? We've had a bug open for it for a while (bug
> #386475) but the digests still don't show this. If it is
> simultaneously, we'll need to fix that as well.
I had forgotten to update the catalyst config files in poseidon (amd64
/ x86 build box). I've done that now.
> Can current users also already use the /etc/portage location? If
> so, I can already update the docs now (since I'll need to describe
> both of the locations for a while anyhow).
news item: changes to stages (make.conf and make.profile)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 24-07-2012 06:54, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 23-07-2012 22:10:08 -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
>> On Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 9:58 PM, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
>> <jmbsvicetto@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>> This is just a heads-up for Gentoo users that got used to find
>>> make.conf and make.profile under /etc in stages, that these
>>> files will stop being there and will instead be under
>>> /etc/portage. So we are changing the defaults.
>>
>> I'd spell that out then - just say that no action is required
>> for existing installations, but be aware of the new location on
>> new installs, or feel free to move them if you want.
>
> I still don't see why you'd bother all existing users with that
> info. Just blog, or (better) write a nice email to -announce, and
> update the install docs.
The point of "bugging" all users was to minimize the risk of a user
not being aware of the change. If the general consensus is that this
should not be sent as news item (GLEP42), I'll drop itl
> Also, can you exclude all Prefix profiles for this news item if
> you insist on pushing it out?
I don't know the specific methods to filter news items, so if you or
others can help with that, I'd appreciate.
If anyone has particular suggestions about who should see this news
item, including the filter of how to achieve that, please let me know.
news item: changes to stages (make.conf and make.profile)
