Installing the sabayon custom /etc stuff in portage profile.

Discuss all artwork and development - Suggestions needed

Moderator: Moderators

Postby voxiac » Wed Jun 27, 2007 23:51

Not sure you understood what I was trying to explain.
This is how it works now:
* They add something to /etc/portage/package.mask
* I want to undo it so I just delete it
* Gentoo devs will take care of masking potentially dangerous versions

This is how it will work with that stuff in the profile:
* They add something to /usr/portage/local/sabayon/profiles/sabayon3.4/package.mask
* I want to undo it but now I can't delete it there
* So I have to add to my /etc/portage/package.unmask <--- this is me tweaking their tweaks
* The entry I add to /etc/portage/package.unmask has to be version specific
* I have to update it every time new package comes out by looking whether Gentoo devs did masked new versions or not.

And yeah, you're completely right: the profile does provide a basis for your system. If you put all that stuff which is currently in /etc/portage/package.* of default Sabayon installation you have a fully tweaked system and not a basis.
You can't compare it to gentoo profiles really because they do in fact contain bare minimum. This is not the case with what you suggest.

And... I run amd64 tree (yes, stable)
voxiac
Advanced Hen
 
Posts: 218
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2007 17:05
Location: Denmark

Postby sprig » Thu Jun 28, 2007 0:50

Well, what I can answer to that is that if you specifically want to to unmask a specific package, it means you are interested enough in it to follow it anyway...
I would also not call putting a mask in the profile a 'tweak' - after all, you wouldn't call the stuff which is normally put in gentoo profiles 'tweaks' - would you?

Aside from that, I think that packages should be masked in the profile in pretty extreme cases anyway, such as 2efsprogs maybe (ext4), or stuff that really messes up the system. some things can also be put in etc if necessary - but Imho package masking should be used very sparingly anyway.

You did bring up a good point though and it needs more thought.
sprig
Young Hen
 
Posts: 24
Joined: Mon Jun 04, 2007 19:05

Postby voxiac » Sat Jun 30, 2007 20:30

shwouchk wrote:I would also not call putting a mask in the profile a 'tweak' - after all, you wouldn't call the stuff which is normally put in gentoo profiles 'tweaks' - would you?

E.g. 2007 profile I'm running does contain a tiny 'make.defaults' which can't be called a tweak. What I'm calling tweaks is those package.* files.
Gentoo has profiles/package.mask, Sabayon has a local/layman/sabayon/profiles/package.mask. These two are updated regularly and designed for cases like you've described:
shwouchk wrote:Aside from that, I think that packages should be masked in the profile in pretty extreme cases anyway, such as 2efsprogs maybe (ext4), or stuff that really messes up the system.

To get more specific let's look at the /etc/portage/package.mask with shipped with Sabayon x86-64 mini edition:
Code: Select all
>=sys-apps/groff-1.19
>=media-gfx/gimp-print-5.0.0_rc1
>=media-libs/libdc1394-2.0.0_pre1
>=dev-libs/expat-2.0.0
=media-libs/tunepimp-9999
<=sys-apps/dbus-0.62-r2
=sys-apps/pciutils-2.2.4
>=net-p2p/ktorrent-2.1_beta1
>=dev-libs/g-wrap-1.9.7
>=dev-scheme/slib-3.1.4
=kde-base/kpilot-3.5.6
>=net-print/hplip-1.6.11
>sys-kernel/genkernel-3.4.7-r99
=dev-util/kdevelop-3.3.6
~app-misc/lirc-0.8.1
>app-emulation/kvm-12
=kde-base/kicker-3.5.6-r90
=kde-base/kicker-3.5.6-r91
=kde-base/kicker-3.5.6-r92
=kde-base/kicker-3.5.6-r93
=sys-fs/cryptsetup-luks-1.0.4-r2

This is too polluted with various tweaks to go in a profile IMHO. By polluted I mean this entry for instance:
Code: Select all
>=net-p2p/ktorrent-2.1_beta1

What's wrong with it is that ATM ktorrent-2.1.3 is marked stable but it'll be unavailable for users with this thing in a profile without a voodoo dance I described.

But this inconveniences are not necessarily limited to package.mask. Let's take another case:
Default package.keywords from a default Sabayon installation of the same version contains:
Code: Select all
www-client/mozilla-firefox xforms mozbranding filepicker -linguas_en_GB -linguas_es_AR -linguas_es_ES -linguas_fy -linguas_fy_NL -linguas_ga -linguas_ga_IE -linguas_gu_IN -linguas_ka -linguas_ku -linguas_nb -linguas_nb_NO -linguas_nn -linguas_nn_NO -pa_IN -linguas_pl -linguas_pt -linguas_pt_BR -linguas_pt_PT -linguas_sv_SE -linguas_zh_CN -linguas_zh_TW

(I have no idea why those -linguas* are there - maybe there's a reason but I just can't see it)
So imagine that I wanted to localize my Sabayon installation and set one of those LINGUAS which is being explicitly turned off here. After emerge -pv mozilla-firefox I'll of course still see that it's turned off... I would be hard enough to think of looking in /etc/portage/package.use to check for a line like this one but to go to /usr/portage/local/layman/sabayon/profiles/sabayon3.3/package.use would be beyond me. And when you find it you'll have to add:
Code: Select all
www-client/mozilla-firefox linguas_<lang>_<country>
to /etc/portage/package.use to counter that. Not that hard but still...

What I'm saying is that if we are to have a sabayon profile it needs to have more sane package.* files than these.
voxiac
Advanced Hen
 
Posts: 218
Joined: Sat Feb 10, 2007 17:05
Location: Denmark

Previous

Return to Artwork and Development Suggestions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron