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 Releng

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 02-04-2008, 03:28 AM
"M. Edward (Ed) Borasky"
 
Default Free-standing Portage / Recent stage3 tarballs / Beta

Alex Howells wrote:

I wasn't attempting to state "This does not work!"; merely expressing
that ~arch isn't really a supported platform. Dropping back to stable
isn't really a viable route, once your system is ~arch there's quite a
lot to go <BOOM!> if you tried to globally undo that. Wanna try it?



I've never had to, but yes, it's nearly impossible.


At the moment Gentoo Linux has a reputation as a "ricer" distribution,
and a large proportion of users on ~arch does nothing to solve that...
Speaking entirely frankly I'd love to see increased adoption in
enterprise, there's a whole lot this distribution has to offer to
server farms, for example.


Well, there's nothing wrong with being a ricer. At the very least,
even if you stay with "stable", you can still compile "-O2 -march=" on
Gentoo. Most of the other distros saddle you with i386, and I have no
clue what optimization, if any, they do.


Gentoo in the enterprise? Nobody ever got fired for buying RHEL or
Novell SuSE. It's possible Ubuntu will get to that point someday, but
you aren't going to see a "pure community" distro like Gentoo, Debian,
or even Fedora any place where there's even a whiff of risk aversion.
Enterprise IT departments want to be able to call up a sales rep and
threaten to quit buying if the vendor doesn't come in and fix stuff *now*!



Look at it this way: by running ~arch whilst *not* a Developer or
Arch Tester you're having a very limited impact, or possibly a
negative one. Getting onto the 'track' of contributing to the project
through the various 'Arch Tester' teams is a great way for a "Power
User" to help out; should you feel you're more technically inclined,
can write a useful language or three / hack ebuilds as naturally as
breathing, I know we need Developers! Especially in understaffed
areas like Release Engineering.


Well, I put in a fair amount of free time with various open source
projects. I basically test stuff that I use, like R, Axiom, Common
Music, LyX and the Ruby language and its gems. And I'm also a student of
the innards of the Linux kernel. If I had any time left over from that
and my day job, I'd probably do something like make ebuilds for a few
packages I like that aren't in Portage, for example, the PRISM model
checker, CSound (which is a real challenge, by the way) or SMCSolver.



I'd have liked to see two main things happen with Gentoo 2008.0:

* Get rid of stage3 - all our install documentation works with
just the stage3 right now, we don't "support" stage1/2
installs yet users are /always/ asking on IRC and MLs
for help with a stage1 install because they think it's l33t.
Remove it from mirrors, put it in /experimental, whatever;
we need the stage1/2 somewhere for lotsa reasons, but lets
make it less obvious to weed out those clueless ricers.


Did you mean to say "get rid of stage3" or "get rid of stage1 and
stage2?" Is there a way to do an install without stage3?




(the next one is more of a Portage change)
* Have some warning banners on ~arch and a toggle option for
make.conf to disable them. There are *far* too many people
on IRC suggesting newbies adopt ~arch, and they do so..
They've got no clue what it means, then they bitch/whine
when they hit ABI issues or other problems and blame Gentoo.
Don't document the toggle option in the Install Manual


Well, I'm certainly in favor of disabling it on the LiveCD/DVD
installer! While you're at it, force everyone to take i686 and -O2 along
with not getting ~arch on the installer. In other words, force them to
what they'd get if they installed networkless. Hell, you might as well
force them to take ext3 filesystems, since they're the only ones that
really work.


Those few times I've installed a new box from the LiveCD/DVD, I've
always done it networkless anyhow. That way, I get the box on the air in
a short time and *then* I can indulge my inner ricer.



Suggested value for disabling the big flashy warning banners :P
MODIFYING_ACCEPT_KEYWORDS_MAY_BREAK_MY_BOX_AND_I_U NDERSTAND_THIS


Yep ... fine with me.


--
gentoo-releng@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
 
Old 02-04-2008, 03:42 PM
"Alex Howells"
 
Default Free-standing Portage / Recent stage3 tarballs / Beta

On 04/02/2008, M. Edward (Ed) Borasky <znmeb@cesmail.net> wrote:
> Alex Howells wrote:
> > I wasn't attempting to state "This does not work!"; merely expressing
> > that ~arch isn't really a supported platform. Dropping back to stable
> > isn't really a viable route, once your system is ~arch there's quite a
> > lot to go <BOOM!> if you tried to globally undo that. Wanna try it?
> >
>
> I've never had to, but yes, it's nearly impossible.

.. and this is why I think there should be big warning signs

> Gentoo in the enterprise? Nobody ever got fired for buying RHEL or
> Novell SuSE. It's possible Ubuntu will get to that point someday, but
> you aren't going to see a "pure community" distro like Gentoo, Debian,
> or even Fedora any place where there's even a whiff of risk aversion.
> Enterprise IT departments want to be able to call up a sales rep and
> threaten to quit buying if the vendor doesn't come in and fix stuff *now*!

I actually know of several server farms and supercomputers which run
it right now, and I know plenty of universities with 1000+ systems
deployed too; my alma mater uses very basic installs of Gentoo Linux
for X11 to connect to Citrix, it works very well, is easy to update en
masse, etc. They've got a mixture of Solaris 10 and Gentoo deployed on
servers too.

Maybe I'm being incorrect when classing 'enterprise' as start-ups, but
I wasn't excluding them from my previous statement - what I'd like is
increased adoption in business generally, we already see some shops
running Gentoo Linux because they've realized their "in house" guys
are just as good as the some of the chaps on RHELs support line.

> > I'd have liked to see two main things happen with Gentoo 2008.0:
> >
> > * Get rid of stage3 - all our install documentation works with
> > just the stage3 right now, we don't "support" stage1/2
> > installs yet users are /always/ asking on IRC and MLs
> > for help with a stage1 install because they think it's l33t.
> > Remove it from mirrors, put it in /experimental, whatever;
> > we need the stage1/2 somewhere for lotsa reasons, but lets
> > make it less obvious to weed out those clueless ricers.
>
> Did you mean to say "get rid of stage3" or "get rid of stage1 and
> stage2?" Is there a way to do an install without stage3?

I meant stop shipping stage1 and stage2 in the releases directory.
Already it's not mentioned in documentation, but it's presence in the
place we tell folks to download stuff from makes people go, "I wanna
do that! l33t!".

There are only a few corner cases where you *should* install from
stage1, notably if you want to significantly alter the bootstrap
process. Given how stage3 gets 'out of date' pretty fast after a
release due to us having a fairly dynamic tree though, if you wanted
to make core changes, it's going to be just as fast (and 10x more
supported) to emerge -e world.

That leaves:

* Ship 'em in /experimental to all our mirrors
* Keep 'em on one of our Infra boxes at $sponsor

Don't think there's much between those choices, given stage1+2
shouldn't really need to be downloaded a great deal. In terms of
traffic volume, the biggest 'hit' seems to be folks downloading
LiveCDs + stage3.

> > * Have some warning banners on ~arch and a toggle option for
> > make.conf to disable them. There are *far* too many people
> > on IRC suggesting newbies adopt ~arch, and they do so..
> > They've got no clue what it means, then they bitch/whine
> > when they hit ABI issues or other problems and blame Gentoo.
> > Don't document the toggle option in the Install Manual
[snip..]
> > Suggested value for disabling the big flashy warning banners :P
> > MODIFYING_ACCEPT_KEYWORDS_MAY_BREAK_MY_BOX_AND_I_U NDERSTAND_THIS
>
> Yep ... fine with me.

I'm not suggesting we remove flexibility here, just make it *very*
obvious when you might be doing something daft. If power users want
to run ~arch with XFS on a desktop system that doesn't have a UPS,
they're stupid, but we shouldn't restrain them from doing that
--
gentoo-releng@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
 
Old 02-05-2008, 06:35 AM
 
Default Free-standing Portage / Recent stage3 tarballs / Beta

Thanks for all the feedback, everyone.

> Markus Hauschild:
> If you really want to test ~arch packets you don't necessarily need
> ~arch stages to download, you can just switch your Installation to
> ~arch and then file bugs etc.

That's what we did, and what generated the ~tarball suggestion.

> Alex Howells:
> Look at it this way: by running ~arch whilst *not* a Developer or
> Arch Tester you're having a very limited impact, or possibly a
> negative one. Getting onto the 'track' of contributing to the project

Contributing...I just tried a couple of suggestions? They seem good to
me.

It isn't preference or 133t-ness. There are technical issues with the
user machines and desktop lust.

I'm not saying "change your ways" but rather "tarball ~stuff" to help
sysadmins make their own design choices. Any choice is a balancing act
of competing requirements.

> They've got no clue what it means, then they bitch/whine
> when they hit ABI issues or other problems and blame Gentoo.

Not in this discussion? All I want is a cleaner way to install ~arch.
Put all the warning stickers you want. I agree it is *not* for average
users.

Many feel Debian unstable is the more stable branch, because it swallows
upstream bugfixes. Debatable; can depend on the system spec. Debian
focuses too much on servers -- it ought to fork a desktop branch, if you
ask me. Some Debian distros have done just that. Anyway the point is,
there can be legit reasons to run unstable; reasonable people can
differ.

There is lag between upstream package releases and distro adoption.
Typical scene: an upstream package advertises "now more stable!" but
the distro takes a year or two rolling it in. Worse scene: upstream
package advertises "now supports your hardware!" but again, the distro
takes 1-2 years.

So the dilemma: which branch is really the more "stable"? The one that
the distro calls stable, or the one with all the latest from upstream?
There is no one answer of course. Obviously a release engineering
statement on the matter is going to be different from another viewpoint.

I follow release engineering's worries about user install procedures,
and that's legit. But I am a sysadmin, unafraid of reasonable breakage
that I can fix. I would not recommend average people install ~arch any
more than you would. All I'm saying is ~tarballs would be nice for
experts.

My job reviews aren't based on making Gentoo penetrate this or that
market sector but making computers work. I don't have the luxury of
explaining to folks that "the distro will take care of it in 1-2 years"
or endlessly fiddling with custom package selections ("apt-pinning" in
Debian). Users want me out of their cubes, fast.

> run ~arch with XFS on a desktop system that doesn't have a UPS

Guilty as charged. Running Debian unstable on XFS for years, through
dozens of storm blackouts, and zero data loss. Ext3 lost plenty of data
before we gave up on it. Have no intention of using ext4, either.

We should have UPSes, if only the bean counters would stop retorting
that we've never lost data, so why do we need 'em...ha.

(Good fstab tips: barrier, noatime, nodiratime...and /tmp and /var/log
in tmpfs...)

The consensus here is that we'll wait for beta release and install that
with ~arch keyword. Lookin' forward to it.
--

davecode@nospammail.net

--
http://www.fastmail.fm - One of many happy users:
http://www.fastmail.fm/docs/quotes.html

--
gentoo-releng@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
 
Old 02-05-2008, 12:57 PM
"M. Edward (Ed) Borasky"
 
Default Free-standing Portage / Recent stage3 tarballs / Beta

davecode@nospammail.net wrote:

run ~arch with XFS on a desktop system that doesn't have a UPS


Guilty as charged. Running Debian unstable on XFS for years, through
dozens of storm blackouts, and zero data loss. Ext3 lost plenty of data
before we gave up on it. Have no intention of using ext4, either.


Ah ... I've been running (Gentoo) reiser3 on my workstation here. I
never thought to try XFS or JFS, but I too have given up on ext3 (ecause
it's slow). reiser3 can be slow on writing, though.

--
gentoo-releng@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
 
Old 02-05-2008, 01:01 PM
Dale
 
Default Free-standing Portage / Recent stage3 tarballs / Beta

M. Edward (Ed) Borasky wrote:
> davecode@nospammail.net wrote:
>>> run ~arch with XFS on a desktop system that doesn't have a UPS
>>
>> Guilty as charged. Running Debian unstable on XFS for years, through
>> dozens of storm blackouts, and zero data loss. Ext3 lost plenty of data
>> before we gave up on it. Have no intention of using ext4, either.
>
> Ah ... I've been running (Gentoo) reiser3 on my workstation here. I
> never thought to try XFS or JFS, but I too have given up on ext3
> (ecause it's slow). reiser3 can be slow on writing, though.

If you plan to use XFS, make sure your UPS is working. In my
experience, it does not like power failures at all. Maybe things have
changed since tho.

Dale

:-) :-)
--
gentoo-releng@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
 
Old 02-05-2008, 01:21 PM
"Alex Howells"
 
Default Free-standing Portage / Recent stage3 tarballs / Beta

On 05/02/2008, Dale <dalek1967@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> If you plan to use XFS, make sure your UPS is working. In my
> experience, it does not like power failures at all. Maybe things have
> changed since tho.
>

It uses very aggressive caching to get decent speed. Take a decent
database box with 32GB RAM, assume MySQL is underworked at the moment
and using 11GB then your power quits on ya.... chances are you just
lost 21GB of your "most used" data which would probably be most of
/var/lib/mysql

Under no circumstances is XFS safe without a UPS. It has not improved
in this regard and probably never will. Anyone advising you to deploy
XFS in a production environment without UPS on 'critical' data is a
fool.

Just my two cents, of course, and lets get back on topic?
--
gentoo-releng@lists.gentoo.org mailing list
 
Old 02-05-2008, 01:29 PM
Dale
 
Default Free-standing Portage / Recent stage3 tarballs / Beta

Alex Howells wrote:

On 05/02/2008, Dale <dalek1967@bellsouth.net> wrote:


If you plan to use XFS, make sure your UPS is working. In my
experience, it does not like power failures at all. Maybe things have
changed since tho.




It uses very aggressive caching to get decent speed. Take a decent
database box with 32GB RAM, assume MySQL is underworked at the moment
and using 11GB then your power quits on ya.... chances are you just
lost 21GB of your "most used" data which would probably be most of
/var/lib/mysql

Under no circumstances is XFS safe without a UPS. It has not improved
in this regard and probably never will. Anyone advising you to deploy
XFS in a production environment without UPS on 'critical' data is a
fool.

Just my two cents, of course, and lets get back on topic?




That was my point.* I lost a install once because of XFS and a power
failure.* It would not even think of booting again.* I'm on reiserfs
here and so far, so good.* I guess all file systems have some good
points and some bad points.* Just got to know them before you choose
the wrong one.* :/



On point tho, is the last available "official" stage3 tarball the same
as the one on the 2007 CD?



Dale



:-)* :-)
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 12:50 PM.

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