RE: [gentoo-alt] Portability of Prefixed installs?

[Markus Duft]

>
> Hi all,
>
> We have a prefixed Gentoo disk image here at our office that we
> distribute to developers on OS X boxes so they can run full
> development environments locally. It has postgresql, memcached, and
> other goodies pre-installed with the right USE flags.

Very, very cool :) I did about the same for Windows here at our company, only in a more generic manner. I have a setup program installing the prefix into a specific location, and adapting the config files to make the installing user the owner of the prefix. I plan to share those images with the public, but am still looking for a place to put them at (1.5Gb for three CD images...)

@grobian: what about such a place. Should I talk to infra, or will you again? Whom could I contact from gentooexperimental.org for example (although I like the idea of the images being hosted on some g.o server, that would be more official...)

Cheers, Markus

>
> Presently, the images are pretty much fixed once they're distributed
> -- any updates have to come from the person who made the image. It
> seems that their username is hard-coded in some scripts and config
> files here and there, and emerge is unhappy if run by a different
> user. I've changed those entries manually before, but I'm wondering if
> it's really necessary that the username be hard-coded anywhere? Would
> it be easy to make the code user-agnostic?
>
> It would be even more awesome to keep installs agnostic with respect
> to where they are mounted, but I'm guessing this would be a much
> larger undertaking, requiring more fundamental changes to portage.
>
> Neither of these issues is a huge deal, as we're happy just
> distributing new images from time to time and not making our devs deal
> with system management, but there've been several times when I've
> wanted these flexibilities from portage.
>
> Thanks,
> Peter
> --
> gentoo-alt@l.g.o mailing list


-- 
gentoo-alt@l.g.o mailing list