Re: [gentoo-user] Why busybox?

[Jack]

On 2020.04.05 16:03, Mark Knecht wrote:
On Sun, Apr 5, 2020 at 10:54 AM Ian Zimmerman   
wrote:

>
> Why does portage insist on installing busybox for me?
>
> As far as I know the only use for it on a desktop system is for
> initramfs.  I have no initramfs, therefore I have no need for  
busybox.
> I unmerged it and nothing bad happened except for a warning from  
portage

> that it is part of my profile set.  I went ahead and ignored the
> warning.
>
> But now I updated the tree and emerge -p shows it will be installed
> again.  Why is that?  The only reverse dependencies are virtuals  
which

> are satisfied in other ways, like virtual/awk.  So is it the profile
> thing?  But I have done the same with other profile packages  
(notably

> editors/nano) and those are _not_ coming back.
>
> --
> Ian

emerge is your friend. Something like

emerge -p -e

should. I believe, tell you where every package dependency comes from.

It's not always fun to read but the answer to your question should be  
there.


- Mark
I find "emerge -p -c busybox" even easier, and it tells me busybox is  
required by @system.


Jack

Re: [gentoo-user] Why busybox?

[Mark Knecht]

On Sun, Apr 5, 2020 at 1:19 PM Dale  wrote:

> Mark Knecht wrote:
>
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 5, 2020 at 10:54 AM Ian Zimmerman 
> wrote:
> >
> > Why does portage insist on installing busybox for me?
> >
> > As far as I know the only use for it on a desktop system is for
> > initramfs.  I have no initramfs, therefore I have no need for busybox.
> > I unmerged it and nothing bad happened except for a warning from portage
> > that it is part of my profile set.  I went ahead and ignored the
> > warning.
> >
> > But now I updated the tree and emerge -p shows it will be installed
> > again.  Why is that?  The only reverse dependencies are virtuals which
> > are satisfied in other ways, like virtual/awk.  So is it the profile
> > thing?  But I have done the same with other profile packages (notably
> > editors/nano) and those are _not_ coming back.
> >
> > --
> > Ian
>
> emerge is your friend. Something like
>
> emerge -p -e
>
> should. I believe, tell you where every package dependency comes from.
>
> It's not always fun to read but the answer to your question should be
> there.
>
> - Mark
>
>
>
> I usually do a emerge -et either -p or -a then package name to get a tree
> list of what it depends on and what is pulling it in.  On some packages
> tho, it can get rather long.  Example:
>
> emerge -etp firefox
>
> or
>
> emerge -eta firefox
>
> Doesn't either one of those q commands or equery do this as well???
>
> Whichever works.  ;-)
>
> Dale
>
> :-)  :-)
>
>
> Yes, I forgot to add the 'tree' function. Thanks!

Re: [gentoo-user] Why busybox?

[Dale]

Mark Knecht wrote:
>
>
> On Sun, Apr 5, 2020 at 10:54 AM Ian Zimmerman  > wrote:
> >
> > Why does portage insist on installing busybox for me?
> >
> > As far as I know the only use for it on a desktop system is for
> > initramfs.  I have no initramfs, therefore I have no need for busybox.
> > I unmerged it and nothing bad happened except for a warning from portage
> > that it is part of my profile set.  I went ahead and ignored the
> > warning.
> >
> > But now I updated the tree and emerge -p shows it will be installed
> > again.  Why is that?  The only reverse dependencies are virtuals which
> > are satisfied in other ways, like virtual/awk.  So is it the profile
> > thing?  But I have done the same with other profile packages (notably
> > editors/nano) and those are _not_ coming back.
> >
> > --
> > Ian
>
> emerge is your friend. Something like 
>
> emerge -p -e
>
> should. I believe, tell you where every package dependency comes from.
>
> It's not always fun to read but the answer to your question should be
> there.
>
> - Mark
>


I usually do a emerge -et either -p or -a then package name to get a
tree list of what it depends on and what is pulling it in.  On some
packages tho, it can get rather long.  Example:

emerge -etp firefox

or

emerge -eta firefox

Doesn't either one of those q commands or equery do this as well???

Whichever works.  ;-)

Dale

:-)  :-) 

Re: [gentoo-user] Why busybox?

[Mark Knecht]

On Sun, Apr 5, 2020 at 10:54 AM Ian Zimmerman  wrote:
>
> Why does portage insist on installing busybox for me?
>
> As far as I know the only use for it on a desktop system is for
> initramfs.  I have no initramfs, therefore I have no need for busybox.
> I unmerged it and nothing bad happened except for a warning from portage
> that it is part of my profile set.  I went ahead and ignored the
> warning.
>
> But now I updated the tree and emerge -p shows it will be installed
> again.  Why is that?  The only reverse dependencies are virtuals which
> are satisfied in other ways, like virtual/awk.  So is it the profile
> thing?  But I have done the same with other profile packages (notably
> editors/nano) and those are _not_ coming back.
>
> --
> Ian

emerge is your friend. Something like

emerge -p -e

should. I believe, tell you where every package dependency comes from.

It's not always fun to read but the answer to your question should be there.

- Mark

Re: [gentoo-user] Why busybox?

[Ashley Dixon]

On Sun, Apr 05, 2020 at 10:53:50AM -0700, Ian Zimmerman wrote:
> Why does portage insist on installing busybox for me?

BusyBox is just a minimal set of utilities which would be useful for rescuing a
system, or to be used on an embedded system with extreme limitations. There's
not really any reason to remove this, but if you insist...

> As far as I know the only use for it on a desktop system is for
> initramfs.  I have no initramfs, therefore I have no need for busybox.
> I unmerged it and nothing bad happened except for a warning from portage
> that it is part of my profile set.  I went ahead and ignored the
> warning.
> 
> But now I updated the tree and emerge -p shows it will be installed
> again.  Why is that?  The only reverse dependencies are virtuals which
> are satisfied in other ways, like virtual/awk.  So is it the profile
> thing?  But I have done the same with other profile packages (notably
> editors/nano) and those are _not_ coming back.

Read more about profiles at [1]; a guide to making custom profiles can be found
as a subsection. Portage's attempts to reinstall BusyBox is not unexpected
behaviour, as the "profile" defines a core set of packages which should be
installed for a particular use case (e.g., desktop profiles mandate an X
server). Thus, when you invoke Portage to do a full overhaul, it interprets
anything defined in the profile which is not installed on the system to be an
error which needs to be rectified.

If you really don't want to have Portage install BusyBox, see the --exclude
option of emerge. But again, there's really no need to remove BusyBox unless
you're _very_ short on disk space.

[1] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Profile_(Portage)

-- 

Ashley Dixon
suugaku.co.uk

2A9A 4117
DA96 D18A
8A7B B0D2
A30E BF25
F290 A8AA



signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

[gentoo-user] Why busybox?

[Ian Zimmerman]

Why does portage insist on installing busybox for me?

As far as I know the only use for it on a desktop system is for
initramfs.  I have no initramfs, therefore I have no need for busybox.
I unmerged it and nothing bad happened except for a warning from portage
that it is part of my profile set.  I went ahead and ignored the
warning.

But now I updated the tree and emerge -p shows it will be installed
again.  Why is that?  The only reverse dependencies are virtuals which
are satisfied in other ways, like virtual/awk.  So is it the profile
thing?  But I have done the same with other profile packages (notably
editors/nano) and those are _not_ coming back.

-- 
Ian