Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: meino.cramer@×××.de
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo SDcard updates tactics
Date: Tue, 07 Oct 2014 16:02:41
Message-Id: 20141007160140.GC3826@solfire
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo SDcard updates tactics by Hinnerk van Bruinehsen
1 Hinnerk van Bruinehsen <h.v.bruinehsen@×××××××××.de> [14-10-07 17:23]:
2 > On Tue, Oct 07, 2014 at 05:29:11AM +0200, meino.cramer@×××.de wrote:
3 > > Hi,
4 > >
5 > > There are two SDcards of the same brand and model.
6 > > The first one cariies a not so current Gentoo Linux.
7 > > The second one is empty.
8 > > Now the first one is image-copied to the second one with dd,
9 > > which copies the contents of the whole device (not the partitions).
10 > >
11 > > Then the first one is put into my embedded system, boots up and
12 > > the normal eix-syn/emerge/compiel is done to update the system (whch
13 > > takes a longer time becaus this is an embedded system).
14 > >
15 > > Will I get a technical identical working and valid copy of the first sdcard onto
16 > > the second sdcard if I rsync the relevant partition of the first onto
17 > > the second sdcard.
18 > >
19 > > Or will I produce crap this way? Is this valid Gentoo-wise?
20 > >
21 >
22 > Moin (again),
23 >
24 > this will work quite well, at least if you take care (I used this way for
25 > moving my systems to new drives or even via network to different boxes (in the
26 > latter case CFLAGS and kernel config will become important again, as you can
27 > imagine)).
28 > Ideally you should run rsync with the option to remove files not found on the
29 > source drive (otherwise you'll likely clutter the target with stale files
30 > (especially documentation but also older library versions).
31 > You will also need to change the configs (at least static network & hostname,
32 > possibly more) so that both systems don't clash, at least if you plan to run
33 > both on the same network.
34 > The "rm" option of rsync is potentially dangerous (e.g. you can delete files
35 > from home).
36 > If you are careful this is a valid way of doing that. Another option that would
37 > move quite a bit work from one machine to the other is just building binpkgs on
38 > one host and use the other one as binhost. That way (if you use identical
39 > /etc/portage dirs) you can quite savely use portage and nonetheless negate the
40 > use of compiling (there will still be the load of dependency resplution,
41 > extracting etc).
42 >
43 > WKR
44 > Hinnerk
45
46 Moin Hinnerk, ;)
47
48 Good points...I have not thought deep enough about it - I think
49 (recursion?)...
50 Currently the "master card" is being updated via eix/emerge...and
51 then... :)
52
53 Best regards,
54 Meino