> On Fri, Jan 12, 2001 at 06:02:12PM +0100, Achim Gottinger wrote:
> > I allways thought sys contains everything required to build itself and
> > everythin required for a minimum runtime system. perl is needed to build
> > some of the sys packages, thats why it is there. python is not required for
> > building and not for runtime, so it is not there.
> You are correct that if we need a package that's used in rebuilding the system,
> it's included in sys. But, this isn't the *only* way we select packages for
> sys. All the packages in sys-devel, sys-apps, sys-kernel and sys-libs make up
> the "base" system. My goals for the base system are to provide a reasonably
> complete, fully-functional basic Linux system. There are a lot of things in
> sys that aren't really needed, such as man pages and the "bc" utility.
You wanted a full set of man-pages in sys and I found that it is usefull even on
a minimum system because it is needed if something in the compilation goes wrong.
bc is required for compilation of a few packages I think if not we can drop it.
> they're included because they are useful and popular things that are very
> helpful to Linux users (and expected to be available). Rather than think of
> sys as "everything required for a minimum runtime system", think of it as
> "everything you'd expect to find in a basic but fully-functional (and useful)
> console-based Linux system".
Hmm, rmm, no. sys is the nucleus that is able to reproduce itself and the core
for everythin else. Otherwise we must include tcsh/wget/cvs/telnet.......
And finaly our sys is 500MB big.
Your idea of a minimum system is something I always hated on SuSE. If I wanted a
real minimum sytsem I had to remove dozends of for my situation really unneeded
installing what they called minimum-system.
Why not continue like we did it in the past and add usefull packages from other
categories to the
> If someone needs a "stripped sys" (for a special
> project), it's easy enough to remove the packages that aren't needed (or use a
> build list to avoid building/merging them in the first place).
> > If you insist in having python in sys.tbz2 I can include a version compiled
> > without use tcl-tk in the sys.tbz2 but dev-lang is the place. :-)
> Well, one of the nice things about being the Chief Architect is that I never
> need to insist :)
Is this the way you think about partnership? I spend nearly every day last year to
gentoo-linux (Had earned enogh
money last year to be able to do that) and I always (beside our discussions about
xml/ebuild :-) ) found you are able
to discuss things out.
> I'll wait for further comments. The two alternatives I'm
> considering are the python-x11 package
Can't the X/tc-tk support be compiled as a separate module?
> and the "rebuild it for X support"
With "use tc-tk X" ?
> Best Regards,
> Daniel Robbins <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> President/CEO http://www.gentoo.org
> Gentoo Technologies, Inc.
> gentoo-dev mailing list