| 1 |
On 10/30/2010 05:09 AM, Markos Chandras wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sat, Oct 30, 2010 at 10:05:17AM +0400, Peter Volkov wrote: |
| 3 |
>> В Птн, 29/10/2010 в 09:11 -0700, Alec Warner пишет: |
| 4 |
>>> On Fri, Oct 29, 2010 at 5:21 AM, Markos Chandras <hwoarang@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
>>> Can I install a machine with the server profile and USE=-ldap, but |
| 6 |
>>> still get ldap + pam working? |
| 7 |
>>> Can I install a machine with the server profile and USE=-apache, but |
| 8 |
>>> still get apache + php working? apache + rails? |
| 9 |
>>> How many packages support each USE flag? |
| 10 |
>>> How many of those packages have IUSE defaults for +ldap or +apache already? |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
>> Having lxc/openvz/vserver technologies at hand it's not rare to split |
| 13 |
>> LAMP server into a number of virtual servers (containers): mysql / |
| 14 |
>> backend with php / frontend / smtp - everything sits in its own |
| 15 |
>> container. And USE=apache will be used only in _one_ container. Also not |
| 16 |
>> all servers are web servers. So IMO server profile should be just |
| 17 |
>> minimal profile that hints users that this profile will stay minimal and |
| 18 |
>> usable for all kinds of servers. That said I think server profile is |
| 19 |
>> useless and for servers I maintain my own profiles. |
| 20 |
>> |
| 21 |
>> -- |
| 22 |
>> Peter. |
| 23 |
>> |
| 24 |
>> |
| 25 |
> Exactly! How about the warning message. Should the statement about |
| 26 |
> gcc+glibc be removed and keep the one about hardened but make it a bit |
| 27 |
> different?Like "This profile is making use of a minimal set of use flag. |
| 28 |
> You may find it useful in a server environment. However, If you are seeking |
| 29 |
> for extra security, please check the Hardened project |
| 30 |
> (http://hardened.gentoo.org)." |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
What exactly is the intended use of the server flag? |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
When I want a minimal image, I usually just use the default profile. |
| 36 |
That is pretty-much a bare-bones gentoo install. I can see the use of |
| 37 |
desktop, and I can see the use of hardened. Right now server just looks |
| 38 |
like default with random stuff for various kinds of servers added. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
I could see if server had a different set of keywords and QA policy |
| 41 |
(like debian stable), or if there were a set of use flags that would be |
| 42 |
universally useful on a server and not on a desktop. |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
Right now it just seems like the server profile exists since lots of |
| 45 |
other distros have server editions, so we should too. If that is the |
| 46 |
case, why not just point users to the default profile, or hardened?' |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
I'd be curious what the users of the server profile say. If anything |
| 49 |
they are the ones we should be listening to since they've found a use |
| 50 |
for it. |
| 51 |
|
| 52 |
Rich |
Archives