FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Gentoo > Gentoo Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 10-12-2012, 11:43 AM
"Gregory M. Turner"
 
Default Proposal: removing "server" profile variants from profiles.desc

On 10/11/2012 3:31 PM, Ben Kohler wrote:

There are other ways to achieve a "lighter" system, but that's not really
what this is about. The server profiles are not any lighter than the base
profiles.

To those in favor of keeping some kind of "server" profile around, how
would it differ from the base profile? What would you enable or disable on
top of the base? I am pretty sure that the current USE="-perl -python snmp
truetype xml" is not what any of you would suggest.

In my opinion, removing /usr/portage/profiles/targets/server/make.defaults
and having the "server" target apply nothing over the base profiles, and
then dropping the warning from the server profiles, would be a better
situation than where we are now.

-Ben


That seems pretty reasonable.

Another possibility, I suppose, would be to combine Rich's idea with
yours and get:


base -> minimal -> server (noop)

Also super-easy if we just build the above cascade, take what's in
server, move it into minimal, git rid of the awful warning, and call it
fixed.


At least by clarifying what is meant by "server", we might inspire
someone to contribute more enhancements later.


Kind of the opposite of your original proposal, Ben :P

At least we've established broad consensus that the warning should be
silenced.


-gmt
 
Old 10-12-2012, 12:46 PM
Sergey Popov
 
Default Proposal: removing "server" profile variants from profiles.desc

11.10.2012 23:22, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> On Thursday 11 October 2012 14:56:11 Ben Kohler wrote:
>> I would like to suggest that the "server" profile variants
>> (ie default/linux/amd64/10.0/server) be unlisted from profiles.desc, so
>> that they do not show up in "eselect profile list" for new users. As far
>> as I know, this server target is unmaintained, undesirable, and somewhat
>> silly, if you look at its make.defaults. If this target is being kept
>> around just so we don't break older setups, then simply removing from
>> profiles.desc would allow these systems to keep using the profile, without
>> presenting it as a viable option for new users.
> sounds like something to fix rather than punt. i don't know why you think
> having server profiles is "undesirable", but i certainly desire it on many
> systems. like servers. the desktop and developer profiles are not
> appropriate.
> -mike
Indeed. Hardened server profile does not fit in all cases, some
non-hardened server profile should exist, BUT without this warning(if
it's usable, of course), and probably with better support.
 
Old 10-12-2012, 01:36 PM
Rich Freeman
 
Default Proposal: removing "server" profile variants from profiles.desc

On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 8:46 AM, Sergey Popov <pinkbyte@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Indeed. Hardened server profile does not fit in all cases, some
> non-hardened server profile should exist, BUT without this warning(if
> it's usable, of course), and probably with better support.

Well, support is mainly a matter of people stepping up to make it
happen, as with all things. I think that lack of interest in this
profile in general is at the heart of the problem. I see no reason to
go killing it, but making it useful is a matter of those with an
interest getting together and deciding what it should be.

Rich
 
Old 10-12-2012, 01:53 PM
Mike Gilbert
 
Default Proposal: removing "server" profile variants from profiles.desc

On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 4:18 AM, Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 4:08 AM, Markos Chandras <hwoarang@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> +1. I want these profiles to *staty*. I am using this profile on my
>> "home boxes". It is the most minimal profile as the rest of the
>> profiles pull in too much useless stuff. What is wrong with these
>> profiles anyway?
>
> Looking at the actual profiles themselves, using server vs the base
> profile makes these changes:
> USE="-perl -python snmp truetype xml"
>

perl and python have not been enabled in the default/linux profile for
some time now:

RCS file: /var/cvsroot/gentoo-x86/profiles/default/linux/make.defaults,v

revision 1.15
date: 2011-10-05 15:22:13 -0400; author: darkside; state: Exp;
lines: +2 -2; commitid: 2e764e8cae624567;
Remove USE={python,perl} from default profile, as discussed/announced.
Bug 250179

Disabling those flags in the server profile is redundant.
 
Old 10-12-2012, 02:13 PM
Ben Kohler
 
Default Proposal: removing "server" profile variants from profiles.desc

This is why I said that the server profile are no lighter than the base. *It's actually the base PLUS "snmp truetype xml". *
My original suggestion of hiding or removing the server profiles was based on the assumption that no one wants to maintain it. *The server profiles *in their current state* are silly & undesirable, in my view. *The server target has not been touched in almost 2 years, and most of the people using it are doing so based on false assumptions.

If it is to remain in its current state, I think it should at least be removed from the .desc listing. *If we have a plan to make the server profiles useful again, as a purposeful set of flags applied against the base, then keeping these profiles listed is great. *I would use a server profile myself, in such case.

-Ben

On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 8:53 AM, Mike Gilbert <floppym@gentoo.org> wrote:

On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 4:18 AM, Rich Freeman <rich0@gentoo.org> wrote:

> On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 4:08 AM, Markos Chandras <hwoarang@gentoo.org> wrote:

>> +1. I want these profiles to *staty*. I am using this profile on my

>> "home boxes". It is the most minimal profile as the rest of the

>> profiles pull in too much useless stuff. What is wrong with these

>> profiles anyway?

>

> Looking at the actual profiles themselves, using server vs the base

> profile makes these changes:

> USE="-perl -python snmp truetype xml"

>



perl and python have not been enabled in the default/linux profile for

some time now:



RCS file: /var/cvsroot/gentoo-x86/profiles/default/linux/make.defaults,v



revision 1.15

date: 2011-10-05 15:22:13 -0400; *author: darkside; *state: Exp;

lines: +2 -2; *commitid: 2e764e8cae624567;

Remove USE={python,perl} from default profile, as discussed/announced.

Bug 250179



Disabling those flags in the server profile is redundant.
 
Old 10-12-2012, 02:29 PM
Daniel Pielmeier
 
Default Proposal: removing "server" profile variants from profiles.desc

Markos Chandras schrieb am 12.10.2012 10:08:
>
> +1. I want these profiles to *staty*. I am using this profile on my
> "home boxes". It is the most minimal profile as the rest of the
> profiles pull in too much useless stuff. What is wrong with these
> profiles anyway?
>

If you want a minimal profile you don't need the server profile.

"ln -s ${PORTDIR}/profiles/default/linux/${ARCH}/10.0 make.profile"
gives you a minimal profile.

--
Regards
Daniel
 
Old 10-14-2012, 10:00 AM
Markos Chandras
 
Default Proposal: removing "server" profile variants from profiles.desc

On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Daniel Pielmeier <billie@gentoo.org> wrote:
> Markos Chandras schrieb am 12.10.2012 10:08:
>>
>> +1. I want these profiles to *staty*. I am using this profile on my
>> "home boxes". It is the most minimal profile as the rest of the
>> profiles pull in too much useless stuff. What is wrong with these
>> profiles anyway?
>>
>
> If you want a minimal profile you don't need the server profile.
>
> "ln -s ${PORTDIR}/profiles/default/linux/${ARCH}/10.0 make.profile"
> gives you a minimal profile.
>
> --
> Regards
> Daniel
>

I removed the ewarn message from the amd64/10.0/server profile. If
nobody objects I will remove it from the x86 as well (CC'ing x86 to
get their attention)

--
Regards,
Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2
 
Old 10-14-2012, 03:42 PM
Ben Kohler
 
Default Proposal: removing "server" profile variants from profiles.desc

I hope this discussion doesn't end when the warnings are removed. *These server profiles are still useless and misleading, they do not need to exist in their current form. *Your previous statement that these are the most minimal profiles, is not accurate. *The base profiles are the most minimal (non-selinux) ones.

-Ben

On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 5:00 AM, Markos Chandras <hwoarang@gentoo.org> wrote:

On Fri, Oct 12, 2012 at 3:29 PM, Daniel Pielmeier <billie@gentoo.org> wrote:

> Markos Chandras schrieb am 12.10.2012 10:08:

>>

>> +1. I want these profiles to *staty*. I am using this profile on my

>> "home boxes". It is the most minimal profile as the rest of the

>> profiles pull in too much useless stuff. What is wrong with these

>> profiles anyway?

>>

>

> If you want a minimal profile you don't need the server profile.

>

> "ln -s ${PORTDIR}/profiles/default/linux/${ARCH}/10.0 make.profile"

> gives you a minimal profile.

>

> --

> Regards

> Daniel

>



I removed the ewarn message from the amd64/10.0/server profile. If

nobody objects I will remove it from the x86 as well (CC'ing x86 to

get their attention)



--

Regards,

Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2
 
Old 10-14-2012, 07:54 PM
Markos Chandras
 
Default Proposal: removing "server" profile variants from profiles.desc

On Sun, Oct 14, 2012 at 4:42 PM, Ben Kohler <bkohler@gmail.com> wrote:
> I hope this discussion doesn't end when the warnings are removed. These
> server profiles are still useless and misleading, they do not need to exist
> in their current form. Your previous statement that these are the most
> minimal profiles, is not accurate. The base profiles are the most minimal
> (non-selinux) ones.
>
> -Ben
>
>
You need to make a plan then, for smooth transition from server->base
profile. Preferably:

1) a news item explaining why this change is necessary, what useflags
do I need to add to make.conf to keep 'base' and 'server' profiles
compatible (so I don't have to recompile a bunch of packages just
because the default flags changed)
2) Make the server profile fatal when trying to emerge a package when
this profile is selected ( add a profile.bashrc file that simply dies
during pkg_setup)
3) Remove it after N * 30 days

--
Regards,
Markos Chandras / Gentoo Linux Developer / Key ID: B4AFF2C2
 
Old 10-15-2012, 04:22 AM
Mike Frysinger
 
Default Proposal: removing "server" profile variants from profiles.desc

On Sunday 14 October 2012 11:42:32 Ben Kohler wrote:
> I hope this discussion doesn't end when the warnings are removed. These
> server profiles are still useless and misleading, they do not need to exist
> in their current form. Your previous statement that these are the most
> minimal profiles, is not accurate. The base profiles are the most minimal
> (non-selinux) ones.

please stop top posting. you're making a mess of this whole thread.

sounds like we should extend the profiles.desc file or profile structure to
include a description so that people know the intention of each one. the only
marker we had before was implicitly in the name (".../server" and
".../desktop").
-mike
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 09:23 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org