On 08/13/18 13:14, Corentin �Nado� Pazdera wrote: > August 13, 2018 6:58 PM, "james" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Here's what I got running your script:: >> >> /etc # /root/profile-explorer.sh >> --- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages: >> /usr/portage/profiles/base/packages >> --- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages: >> *>=sys-apps/baselayout-2 >> --- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages: >> *>=sys-apps/findutils-4.4 >> --- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages: >> *>=sys-devel/patch-2.7 >> --- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages: >> /usr/portage/profiles/default/linux/packages >> --- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages: >> /usr/portage/profiles/base/packages >> --- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages: >> *>=sys-apps/baselayout-2 >> --- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages: >> *>=sys-apps/findutils-4.4 >> --- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages: >> *>=sys-devel/patch-2.7 >> --- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages: >> /usr/portage/profiles/default/linux/packages >> >> Manually looking a the > > Seems weird, also no need to run it as root...
Exact same output run as user... I suspect it's garbage that's left from the 13.0 profiles days. It's was installed about 5 years ago, and is pretty hacked up (base stabe plus). I guess I can manually edit those files indicated and then your sort of out put will most likely occur.... That's my next test. > Here's my output for comparison : > > ``` > % ./profile-explorer.sh > [+] EROOT : / > [+] PORTDIR : /var/db/repos/gentoo > [+] CURPROFILE: default/linux/amd64/17.0 > [+] EAPI : 5 > > [+] packages (@system) > /var/db/repos/gentoo/profiles/base/packages > /var/db/repos/gentoo/profiles/default/linux/packages > ``` > > And the `explored-packages` file should symply contain a copy of the > different inherited packages > files. > >> less /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages: >> /usr/portage/profiles/base/packages >> >> I see: >> # Old ICU is unsupported. ICU 58 only remains for 13.0 based profiles. >> <dev-libs/icu-59 >> <dev-libs/icu-layoutex-59 >> >> But the system has:: >> >> [I] dev-libs/icu .... 60.2 >> >> equery uses icu >> >> gives me similar info: >> >> --- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages: >> /usr/portage/profiles/base/packages >> --- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages: >> *>=sys-apps/baselayout-2 >> --- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages: >> *>=sys-apps/findutils-4.4 >> --- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages: >> *>=sys-devel/patch-2.7 >> --- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages: >> /usr/portage/profiles/default/linux/packages >> --- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages: >> /usr/portage/profiles/base/packages >> --- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages: >> *>=sys-apps/baselayout-2 >> --- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages: >> *>=sys-apps/findutils-4.4 >> --- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages: >> *>=sys-devel/patch-2.7 >> --- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages: >> /usr/portage/profiles/default/linux/packages >> [ Legend : U - final flag setting for installation] >> [ : I - package is installed with flag ] >> [ Colors : set, unset ] >> * Found these USE flags for dev-libs/icu-60.2: >> U I >> + + abi_x86_32 : 32-bit (x86) libraries >> - - debug : Enable extra debug codepaths, like asserts and extra >> output. If >> you want to get meaningful backtraces see >> >> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Quality_Assurance/Backtraces >> - - doc : Add extra documentation (API, Javadoc, etc). It is >> recommended to >> enable per package instead of globally >> + + examples : Install examples, usually source code >> - - static-libs : Build static versions of dynamic >> librarieshttps://inductiveautomation.com/ as well >> >> Which begs the Q1} can I get rid of the flag icu? What are >> consequences, as a baseline system flag, of it's removal ? >> >> less /usr/portage/profiles/base/packages >> show me more of what the @system set contains. Very interesting and >> useful. I'm thinking of aggregation of those listed packages >> and some basic (ascii) table form (equery,emerge, eix) parsed listing >> of the default and current flag settings. A "verification" tool >> if you like. Surely it would help if this info was (is?) more readily >> available and organized for folks that need a systematic approach, like >> heterogeneous HPC clusters. The tools exist for 'ad-hoc' and one off, >> but more of an organized representation at least at the set level. >> >> I feel like there is an existing tool that can yield all of this >> information, as it is on a current system. I've read where there are >> efforts to clean up the packages and default flags used in @system, >> so the bare minimum list per arch/profiles would ultimately be >> a useful listing, particular for my HPC. In HPC less is always faster >> and better, as it is in security and so many more aspects of CS. >> >> Obviosly, I have a few things to fix on this (fragile) system, but >> that'll happen as I'm at the beginning stages of auto_installs of >> minimized systems. What are your plans for you little script? >> >> Just to match equery uses <flag> and such? >> >> Here's a cutie: >> /usr/portage/profiles/default/linux/amd64/package.use.mask >> >> # Mike Frysinger <[email protected]> (08 May 2016) >> # This target supports VTV #547040. >>> =sys-devel/gcc-4.9 -vtv >> >> # Mike Frysinger <[email protected]> (21 Oct 2014) >> # This target supports ASAN/etc... #504200. >> sys-devel/gcc -sanitize >> >> And where was it that the processor/arch flags are now listed? >> >> tia, >> James >> cat > > To check impact on negating icu on your system : `USE="-icu" emerge -puDU > --with-bdeps=y world` I'd have to marinate on the -U option. I see what it s proposing. > > And concerning processor/arch flags I�d suggest keep exploring profiles, > take a look at > make.defaults files. Exactly. If there ware a list of 5 or 10 of the common arches, those minimal @system and default flag settings would be keenly beneficial. Now that I'm researching to add one (arm64) with at lest 4G of DDR 4, to the HPC, just for testing; I long for a systematic publish reference of of these packages and subsequent (default) flags per arch or per processor. > Here the different files you can find according to PMS > https://dev.gentoo.org/~ulm/pms/head/pms.html#x1-430005.2 That is an excellent read! I'll post back, after some experimentation. > > -- > Corentin �Nado� Pazdera > > James
