Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Martin Vaeth <martin@×××××.de>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-user] Re: Profile listings
Date: Mon, 22 Jun 2015 14:47:25
Message-Id: mm9759$4q8$1@ger.gmane.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-user] Re: Profile listings by James
1 James <wireless@×××××××××××.com> wrote:
2 > There is no dir '/var/portage' on my system. Yet this command works fine:
3 >
4 > "PORTAGE_PROFILE=/var/portage/profiles/default/linux/arm/13.0/armv7a eix -c
5 > --system "
6 >
7 > Strange, to say the least.
8
9 Not at all strange: Again, PORTAGE_PROFILE points to a non-directory,
10 so it is ignored, and the default is chosen.
11
12 >> > But it's a stupid place for it to go on Linux and most of the sane
13 >> > technical Gentoo world agrees it really is a better fit in /var/portage.
14 >
15 > "pig-mess" like I said earlier.
16
17 A default is a default. It is you - the sytem adminstrator - who is
18 responsible to determine the setting most appropriate for his system.
19 For instance, when exporting, a sane place might be
20 /srv/gentoo-repo
21
22 >> Or, as I do, put it in its own partition and you can mount it wherever
23 >> you like. Just point make.conf and repos.conf/gentoo.conf at it.
24 >
25 > Yea, yea, I can make a custom mess too: aka brilliantly (in my own mind)
26 > organize it, I mean.
27
28 That's what you are supposed to do with a meta-distribution,
29 especially if you do not like the default choice.
30
31 > The bottom line for me is:
32 >
33 > 1) folks should be able to migrated up and down the profile tree. It's give
34 > us some neat abilities. If I have a workstation that becomes old, I could
35 > change the profile and move it'down' to default or embedded and turn it
36 > into a decicated, minimized router, firewall, bridge, sniffer etc etc. I
37 > think the offcial word is changing profiles is not recommended.
38
39 If you don't know what you are doing, you keep the pieces:
40 Some conversion (e.g. non-multilib->multilib or 32bit->64bit)
41 are really hard. It won't help you just to change the profile:
42 You would need cross-compilation etc.
43
44 OTOH, if you just want to transform a desktop into a server (e.g.)
45 it is very simple: Mainly this has nothing to do with the profile
46 but with the USE-flags and packages which you select manually.
47
48 > 2) Some thing of a profile needs to exist between an embedded system
49 > (busybox only) and the default.
50
51 No. If you are running an embedded system, you are supposed to be
52 expert enough to make your own profile. If you lack the experience
53 to do it, don't do it, since otherwise you will just end up with a
54 mess anyway. Use instead one of the save profiles and do not try to
55 shrink it beyond sanity, so that things work and do not break
56 unexpectedly.
57
58 > Cleaning up the profiles just seems logical to me, after noodling
59 > around with in the profiles......
60
61 Fine. If you are an expert enough do it. You will have then the
62 experience that nobody else will have exactly your need and thus
63 understand that having a profile only for your need in the main
64 gentoo repository would be pointless. And of course, you are then
65 expert enough to create a custom profile (or build one modifying
66 an exising one) without asking here.
67 If you are not such an expert: See above: Use one of the save profiles
68 and do not try to shrink it beyond sanity, so that things work and do
69 not break unexpectedly.
70
71
72 > 5) Also, security in the cluster/cloud world is almost impossible building
73 > clusters on top of 'bloated OSes and bloated system packages'. YMMV.
74
75 None of the gentoo profiles is bloated (systemd excluded, of course).
76 And even if a package is installed which you do not need, it will not
77 make your system insecure if it is not used. Your configuration and
78 USE-flags are much more important than the tiny list of @system packeges:
79 Shrinking these even more is really only a task for the experienced expert.