Gentoo Archives: gentoo-releng

From: Chris Gianelloni <wolf31o2@g.o>
To: gentoo-releng@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-releng] Re: Feature Requests for 2006.1
Date: Wed, 15 Mar 2006 16:05:58
Message-Id: 1142438524.18730.13.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net
In Reply to: [gentoo-releng] Re: Feature Requests for 2006.1 by Mikey
1 On Wed, 2006-03-15 at 09:34 -0600, Mikey wrote:
2 > logrotate would be nice for obvious reasons on servers
3
4 The only package that uses this correctly is squid, so I'd prefer not to
5 add it.
6
7 > chroot might be nice, as long as it is not too invasive (requires lots of
8 > extra configuration of the packages that utilize it).
9
10 This would be a bit much.
11
12 > My main concern is not really what USE flags need to be added as opposed to
13 > what USE flags might need to be removed. In my opinion a generic server
14 > profile needs to be as generic as possible. For example, cups foomatic gpm
15 > and ldap from dev/2006.1/make.defaults should not go into a generic server
16 > profile because in some cases they make significant differences in how
17 > subsequent packages will be configured - samba and apache2 for examples.
18
19 I would remove gpm, but the others are very unlikely. The purpose here
20 would be to create something that is actually usable as a default.
21 You're more than welcome to customize it yourself, and are expected to
22 do so. Just like how the default USE under the 2006.0 and
23 2006.1/desktop profiles have lots of things some people won't want (both
24 gnome and kde, for example), it is intended to enable support that most
25 people would want, while still remaining somewhat minimal.
26
27 > None of my servers have pointing devices, gpm is not only useless in this
28 > situation, it introduces additional unnecessary maintenance. mailwrapper
29 > is another example of something that only serves to give me headaches ;)
30
31 Again, just because none of *your* servers do not have pointing devices
32 does not make it an accurate general statement. My main goal here is to
33 keep all of the desktop USE flags out of the profile. In this case, I
34 can definitely see a use for gpm on a server, unlike gnome or xmms.
35
36 > I noticed you have STAGE1_USE="nptl nptlonly", does that mean that the CHOST
37 > will need to be changed in stage1 tarballs?
38
39 Actually, I'm building this currently thinking that glibc 2.4 would be
40 used, which is only nptl. I am not going to be building another set of
41 no-nptl stages on x86. The 2006.0 stages will be considered *it* for
42 building on any non-nptl system without using hardened stages.
43
44 Of course, any and all of this is likely to change after further
45 discussion with solar and the rest of the hardened/server/infra guys.
46
47 Honestly, I don't want people to focus on the server profile as much as
48 what really concerns *me* which is the desktop setup that will be used
49 for building the next LiveCD set.
50
51 --
52 Chris Gianelloni
53 Release Engineering - Strategic Lead
54 x86 Architecture Team
55 Games - Developer
56 Gentoo Linux

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
[gentoo-releng] Re: Re: Feature Requests for 2006.1 MIkey <mikey@×××××××××××.com>