[gentoo-user] Re: why --noclear not set on tty1 in default /etc/inittab?

[James]

Jonathan Callen  gentoo.org> writes:

> Until Sven updates his code to not use GuideXML, I have linked to his
> snapshots in my own devspace, under
> .

> The snapshots go back to 2008-01-20, and are current to 2015-07-20.

downloading now.

thx

James

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: why --noclear not set on tty1 in default /etc/inittab?

[Neil Bothwick]

On Sat, 8 Aug 2015 12:21:12 -0600, Jc García wrote:

> > Gentoo doesn't hide it, it merely clears the screen once the boot has
> > completed successfully. If the boot halts, you can see where and,
> > usually, why it stopped. Try that with openUbundora.
 
> Most splash screens I've seen, can change back to the init boot log by
> pressing Tab or Alt+Tab(One of those), this has worked for me across
> 'openUbundora'.

Yes you can, Esc also works, but how many of their target uses know that?
All they see is a pretty splash screen and nothing happening. Having
discovered that Linux doesn't work, they scurry back to Windows.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Women live longer than men because they have so many clothes that they
wouldn't be caught dead in.


pgpgnU0HHPDkf.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

[gentoo-user] Re: why --noclear not set on tty1 in default /etc/inittab?

[walt]

On Sat, 8 Aug 2015 15:21:07 -0400
"Poison BL."  wrote:

> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 2:36 PM, Poison BL.  wrote:
> >
> > So it was prompted by a perceived security issue, but I would
> > happily sit down with any of the DPOs involved in that to hear just
> > how that little bandaid fixes any of the real security issues
> > involved ;)
> >
> > --
> > Joshua M. Murphy
> >
> >
> Actually, now I recall what the actual issue is/was that prompted it.
> While there's no reasonable security issue from the information left
> over by the startup script output, the change was (if I recall from
> reading about it back then) addressing the data left on screen after
> a user session, which very much would fall under the scope of the
> data protection officers mentioned above. When launched from init, as
> agetty is, there's no sensible way to track whether it's being
> launched the first time after boot, or relaunched after the end of a
> previous session, hence the terminal clear by default.

That's why I added this file (can't remember where I got the idea):

cat ~/.bash_logout
clear

I suppose some equivalent mechanism could be added for every
possible shell, which would be a headache for someone :)

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: why --noclear not set on tty1 in default /etc/inittab?

[Fernando Rodriguez]

On Saturday, August 08, 2015 6:28:00 PM Mick wrote:
> On Saturday 08 Aug 2015 18:02:00 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> > On Sat, 8 Aug 2015 16:00:29 + (UTC), Grant Edwards wrote:
> > > Yep, I find it infuriating that by default all distros seem to go to
> > > great effort to hide as much information about the boot/startup
> > > process as possible.  WTF?  Do they think that stuff is top secret or
> > > something?  Are they afraid they'll lose their jobs if that info gets
> > > out?
> > 
> > No, they think that the type of user they are trying to attract is likely
> > to be scared off by all that cryptic text scrolling by. They are probably
> > right.
> > 
> > Gentoo doesn't hide it, it merely clears the screen once the boot has
> > completed successfully. If the boot halts, you can see where and,
> > usually, why it stopped. Try that with openUbundora.
> 
> 
> Also on a server console you may not want anyone walking by to see what 
> services you're running, what your IP address is, what NFS it's connecting 
to, 
> etc.
> 
> Of course, for a home PC with a single user these concerns do not apply.
> 

Besides the point that a server don't usually have a display attached and 
don't sit somewhere where people can just walk by, most of that data is 
network discoverable. Plus if you want to intrude you don't really target a 
specific box but specific services. So I don't see the security problem.

I do see the privacy issue that Poison mentioned but I think it's the user 
reponsibility not to leave sensitive data on screen. I like it the way it is 
but that's only because it looks prettier :)

-- 
Fernando Rodriguez

gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org

[Dale]

Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On 08/08/2015 22:02, Rich Freeman wrote:
>>
>> It is recommended that users not set an INSTALL_MASK, so you won't
>> have to rebuild anything if you don't do that.  If you care that much
>> about inodes I'd probably get rid of /usr/portage before
>> /usr/lib/systemd.  :)
>>
>> On the other hand, setting USE=systemd when you don't intend to use
>> systemd is going to be more invasive in general for the packages that
>> use that flag.  So, you probably wouldn't want to do that.
>>
>> I'm sure there were about 85 posts on the lists taking your side when
>> this was debated before.  I'd suggest looking up the threads (about
>> two years ago I think) rather than recreating them.
>>
> Two years? Was it that long ago? Feels like yesterday.
>
> I recall the discussion well, and it was not pleasant. The only real
> voice of sanity throughout was the final statement by the Council, who
> very wisely shut up right until the end when it was obvious a definitive
> decision was needed.
>
>

I think I found it.  The thread's subject line appears to be:  "Making
systemd more accessible to "normal" users"  The date is about May 2013. 
At least that is the only thread I can find here locally.  My archives
go back to around June 2009.  I searched for both phrases "INSTALL_MASK"
and "USE=systemd".  

If someone wants to go dig on Gmane or something, at least you know the
subject line to search for and a somewhat good time frame. 

Dale

:-)  :-) 

Re: [gentoo-user] why --noclear not set on tty1 in default /etc/inittab?

[Fernando Rodriguez]

On Saturday, August 08, 2015 2:26:50 PM Alan McKinnon wrote:
> On 08/08/2015 14:23, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> > On Sat, 8 Aug 2015 05:13:06 -0400, Fernando Rodriguez wrote:
> > 
> >> To remove safely now you should run:
> >> emerge --deselect dev-haskell/hostname
> >> followed by:
> >> emerge --depclean
> >>
> >> That will remove it only if it's not needed by some other package.
> > 
> > Or emerge --depclean --ask --verbose dev-haskell/hostname
> > 
> > easier to type version
> > 
> > emerge -cav dev-haskell/hostname
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> Then install eix to hugely simplify the search process that should have
> been done as step 1.
> 
> eix hostname
> 
> would have immediately shown that it is a Haskell package and unsuitable.
> 
> 

And don't forget gentoolkit, so next time you screw up a config file instead of 
guessing it, you can easily find out which package provides it with:

equery belongs 

-- 
Fernando Rodriguez

gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org

[Alan McKinnon]

On 08/08/2015 22:02, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 3:49 PM, Heiko Baums  wrote:
>> Am 08.08.2015 um 21:30 schrieb Rich Freeman:
>>> This was the subject of extensive discussion and a council decision.
>>>
>>> The rationale for not configuring the installing of small files via a
>>> USE flag is that it would greatly increase the number of packages that
>>> would depend on that flag, and then when a user swtiches their
>>> configuration they're rebuilding half their system just for the sake
>>> of a few dozen single-inode files.
>>>
>>> If people want to set install masks they can.  However, this will come
>>> at the cost of having to rebuild half your system later if you change
>>> your mind.
>>
>> And what's the difference if I have to rebuild half my system because of
>> a USE flag or because of an INSTALL_MASK?
> 
> It is recommended that users not set an INSTALL_MASK, so you won't
> have to rebuild anything if you don't do that.  If you care that much
> about inodes I'd probably get rid of /usr/portage before
> /usr/lib/systemd.  :)
> 
> On the other hand, setting USE=systemd when you don't intend to use
> systemd is going to be more invasive in general for the packages that
> use that flag.  So, you probably wouldn't want to do that.
> 
> I'm sure there were about 85 posts on the lists taking your side when
> this was debated before.  I'd suggest looking up the threads (about
> two years ago I think) rather than recreating them.
> 

Two years? Was it that long ago? Feels like yesterday.

I recall the discussion well, and it was not pleasant. The only real
voice of sanity throughout was the final statement by the Council, who
very wisely shut up right until the end when it was obvious a definitive
decision was needed.


-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckin...@gmail.com

gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org

[Rich Freeman]

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 3:49 PM, Heiko Baums  wrote:
> Am 08.08.2015 um 21:30 schrieb Rich Freeman:
>> This was the subject of extensive discussion and a council decision.
>>
>> The rationale for not configuring the installing of small files via a
>> USE flag is that it would greatly increase the number of packages that
>> would depend on that flag, and then when a user swtiches their
>> configuration they're rebuilding half their system just for the sake
>> of a few dozen single-inode files.
>>
>> If people want to set install masks they can.  However, this will come
>> at the cost of having to rebuild half your system later if you change
>> your mind.
>
> And what's the difference if I have to rebuild half my system because of
> a USE flag or because of an INSTALL_MASK?

It is recommended that users not set an INSTALL_MASK, so you won't
have to rebuild anything if you don't do that.  If you care that much
about inodes I'd probably get rid of /usr/portage before
/usr/lib/systemd.  :)

On the other hand, setting USE=systemd when you don't intend to use
systemd is going to be more invasive in general for the packages that
use that flag.  So, you probably wouldn't want to do that.

I'm sure there were about 85 posts on the lists taking your side when
this was debated before.  I'd suggest looking up the threads (about
two years ago I think) rather than recreating them.

-- 
Rich

gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org

[Heiko Baums]

Am 08.08.2015 um 21:30 schrieb Rich Freeman:
> This was the subject of extensive discussion and a council decision.
> 
> The rationale for not configuring the installing of small files via a
> USE flag is that it would greatly increase the number of packages that
> would depend on that flag, and then when a user swtiches their
> configuration they're rebuilding half their system just for the sake
> of a few dozen single-inode files.
> 
> If people want to set install masks they can.  However, this will come
> at the cost of having to rebuild half your system later if you change
> your mind.

And what's the difference if I have to rebuild half my system because of
a USE flag or because of an INSTALL_MASK?

The USE flag has the advantage that the necessary packages are
automatically re-emerged by emerge -uDN @world if I would change my mind
later.

gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org

[Rich Freeman]

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 3:22 PM, Heiko Baums  wrote:
> I think this should actually be handled by USE="-systemd", and not by
> INSTALL_MASK.

This was the subject of extensive discussion and a council decision.

The rationale for not configuring the installing of small files via a
USE flag is that it would greatly increase the number of packages that
would depend on that flag, and then when a user swtiches their
configuration they're rebuilding half their system just for the sake
of a few dozen single-inode files.

If people want to set install masks they can.  However, this will come
at the cost of having to rebuild half your system later if you change
your mind.

-- 
Rich

gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org

[Heiko Baums]

Am 08.08.2015 um 19:05 schrieb walt:
> I just noticed that net-misc/netifrc installs two systemd service files,
> which puzzled me.  Is this in preparation for virtualizing openrc?

This is to provide systemd users with the corresponding service files
like OpenRC users get the necessary init scripts. Both are installed by
netifrc and other packages.

That's why I set:
INSTALL_MASK="/lib/systemd /lib32/systemd /lib64/systemd
/usr/lib/systemd /usr/lib32/systemd /usr/lib64/systemd /etc/systemd"

I don't use systemd, so I don't need and want those files.

That said, I don't mind if systemd users get their service files like
OpenRC users get their init scripts, but I don't let portage install the
systemd related files on my system.

I think this should actually be handled by USE="-systemd", and not by
INSTALL_MASK. On the other hand maybe there should be a USE flag
"openrc" which handles the installation of init scripts and OpenRC
related stuff for people who want to use systemd instead of OpenRC.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: why --noclear not set on tty1 in default /etc/inittab?

[Poison BL.]

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 2:36 PM, Poison BL.  wrote:
>
> So it was prompted by a perceived security issue, but I would happily sit
> down with any of the DPOs involved in that to hear just how that little
> bandaid fixes any of the real security issues involved ;)
>
> --
> Joshua M. Murphy
>
>
Actually, now I recall what the actual issue is/was that prompted it. While
there's no reasonable security issue from the information left over by the
startup script output, the change was (if I recall from reading about it
back then) addressing the data left on screen after a user session, which
very much would fall under the scope of the data protection officers
mentioned above. When launched from init, as agetty is, there's no sensible
way to track whether it's being launched the first time after boot, or
relaunched after the end of a previous session, hence the terminal clear by
default.

-- 
Joshua M. Murphy

[gentoo-user] Re: why --noclear not set on tty1 in default /etc/inittab?

[Jonathan Callen]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512

On 08/08/2015 01:37 PM, James wrote:
> James  tampabay.rr.com> writes:
> 
>> there is *no we* in nix unless your or I step up. Fair enough! 
>> ::
> 
>> git clone --bare https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/gli.gitCloning 
>> into bare repository 'gli.git'... fatal: repository 
>> 'https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/gli.git/' not found
> 
>> It'd be wonderfully appreciated if somebody (anybody) has those 
>> old installer sources anywhere I can replicate them for
>> tweaking.
>> 
> 
> SVEN created a wonderful repositor of old portage snapshots::
> 
> 
> http://blog.siphos.be/2013/12/upgrading-old-gentoo-installations/
> 
> But, alas it has "disappeared" too?
> 
> Granted the posted reason is a failure of guidexml:
> 
> "Resource unavailable
> 
> The requested resource uses Gentoo's retired web publication system
> GuideXML. As support for GuideXML was disabled on May 18, 2015, the
> resource can not be displayed. We hope the author provides an
> updated version soon.  "
> 
> 
> So there is no other way to publish archived portage tree 
> snapshots?
> 
> Really?
> 
> Gentoo devs should at least appreciate the frustration the 
> gentoo_commoners experience:: since it looks like the only 
> automated installer we're going to get on gentoo is DYI I'm ok 
> with that but the simplest path (IMHO) is to just start off where 
> the 2009 installer left off.
> 
> 
> After all, all the brilliant minds say that it cannot be be or 
> should not be done (create and automated gentoo installer).
> 
> 
> James

Until Sven updates his code to not use GuideXML, I have linked to his
snapshots in my own devspace, under
.

The snapshots go back to 2008-01-20, and are current to 2015-07-20.

- -- 
Jonathan Callen
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2
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=gdnT
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

Re: [gentoo-user] why --noclear not set on tty1 in default /etc/inittab?

[Felix Miata]

Neil Bothwick composed on 2015-08-08 18:02 (UTC+0100):

> On Sat, 8 Aug 2015 16:00:29 + (UTC), Grant Edwards wrote:

>> Yep, I find it infuriating that by default all distros seem to go to
>> great effort to hide as much information about the boot/startup
>> process as possible.  WTF?  Do they think that stuff is top secret or
>> something?  Are they afraid they'll lose their jobs if that info gets
>> out?

> No, they think that the type of user they are trying to attract is likely
> to be scared off by all that cryptic text scrolling by. They are probably
> right.

> Gentoo doesn't hide it, it merely clears the screen once the boot has
> completed successfully.

Clear happens so quickly the messages may as well have never been there. I
get to see first maybe 4 or 5 if I don't blink at the wrong time.

> If the boot halts, you can see where and,
> usually, why it stopped. Try that with openUbundora.

I'm not sure Fedostemdtering hasn't incorporated noclear for tty1 by default.
I dislike Anaconda, so don't install it often, preferring to upgrade with
Yum->DNF. I just booted an F23 installation that didn't clear, but I can't
say that wasn't because I long ago reconfigured systemd.

openSUSE has been my distro of choice since before it was born, as SuSE 8.2.
Except for a period of transitioning from sysvinit to systemd[1], noclear has
been always its default for *getty on tty1. To actually have all the init
messages reach tty1 requires eliminating splash=silent and/or quiet from boot
stanza, but that's easy rote during its installer's bootloader configuration
step, and easily doable on the fly in Grub GFXboot if overlooked during
installation.

[1] https://bugzilla.opensuse.org/show_bug.cgi?id=721660
-- 
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: why --noclear not set on tty1 in default /etc/inittab?

[Poison BL.]

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 1:28 PM, Mick  wrote:

> On Saturday 08 Aug 2015 18:02:00 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> > On Sat, 8 Aug 2015 16:00:29 + (UTC), Grant Edwards wrote:
> > > Yep, I find it infuriating that by default all distros seem to go to
> > > great effort to hide as much information about the boot/startup
> > > process as possible.  WTF?  Do they think that stuff is top secret or
> > > something?  Are they afraid they'll lose their jobs if that info gets
> > > out?
> >
> > No, they think that the type of user they are trying to attract is likely
> > to be scared off by all that cryptic text scrolling by. They are probably
> > right.
> >
> > Gentoo doesn't hide it, it merely clears the screen once the boot has
> > completed successfully. If the boot halts, you can see where and,
> > usually, why it stopped. Try that with openUbundora.
>
>
> Also on a server console you may not want anyone walking by to see what
> services you're running, what your IP address is, what NFS it's connecting
> to,
> etc.
>
> Of course, for a home PC with a single user these concerns do not apply.
> --
> Regards,
> Mick
>

There's no viable security benefit from not having it visible. On a server
console, there shouldn't be anyone with physical access to the display, the
rack it's mounted in, and for that matter, the data center itself, that
can't be trusted with being aware of a general sense of what a given server
runs. If someone can stand and read your server console without garnering
any notice, they can plug a USB in, reboot to it, and have half your files
before you figure out why your web server stopped answering. For that
matter, all they *have* to do is plug that in, reboot to it, and have it
built to load *their* kernel and *your* user space, with patched kernel
that slowly siphons off data at a rate you don't notice, from within the
kernel. If you don't trust the people who have physical access to your
systems, you cannot trust your systems, period. Yes, there are ways to
prevent even that attack, but the most viable one is a locked door,
requiring more authentication than a simple mechanical lock, between them
and the system.

If it's shared hosting, lock your rack when you're not in front of it,
padlock the server case itself closed (and buy a server that has a proper,
functional, user-space watchable chassis intrusion switch), run
uefi/secureboot with only your key white-listed, lock down booting to only
your privately signed kernel, and for the sake of paranoia... turn off your
monitor when you're not in front of it. Hiding warnings and errors from
yourself during boot that might tip you off to a real security issue does
more to cause risk than mitigate it. Since shared hosting means the network
itself (unless you have a completely captive network within your, locked,
rack) is uncontrolled, details like what services you're running and what
NFS shares you're connecting to are as good as public knowledge anyhow.

As for when/where/why it was introduced, it showed up in agetty in the
util-linux github in May 2011 [1], and included in the release of agetty
2.20 or so, and there's a mention of it in a mailing list [2], to which the
reasoning is given as:

 "I've backported this from our mingetty due to several bug reports from
data protection officers of our customers." - Dr. Werner Fink | 2 Sep 12:43
2011

So it was prompted by a perceived security issue, but I would happily sit
down with any of the DPOs involved in that to hear just how that little
bandaid fixes any of the real security issues involved ;)


[1]
https://github.com/karelzak/util-linux/commit/e85281a8ac887a35a78f4b43e4755a44aecc2fb7
[2] http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.utilities.util-linux-ng/4685

-- 
Joshua M. Murphy

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: why --noclear not set on tty1 in default /etc/inittab?

[Jc García]

2015-08-08 11:02 GMT-06:00 Neil Bothwick :
> Gentoo doesn't hide it, it merely clears the screen once the boot has
> completed successfully. If the boot halts, you can see where and,
> usually, why it stopped. Try that with openUbundora.
>
Most splash screens I've seen, can change back to the init boot log by
pressing Tab or Alt+Tab(One of those), this has worked for me across
'openUbundora'.

gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org

[Alec Ten Harmsel]

On Fri, Aug 07, 2015 at 07:41:27PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> 
> So, I don't know if that makes you more or less worried, but nothing
> has really changed in the last year on the systemd front.  The next
> big change is likely to be virtualizing openrc so that it can be
> uninstalled, and possibly not including it in the stage3, but that
> hasn't really even been seriously discussed.  (Virtualizing it seems
> almost certain to happen (IMHO) once the blockers are fixed, removing
> it may or may not happen, and probably isn't all that important,
> though I'd argue that people running chroots or containers might not
> want an init implementation inside.)
> 
> -- 
> Rich
> 

The virtual already exists (virtual/service-manager). I personally have
openrc and netifrc masked and uninstalled on my machines due to my Ivory
Tower purist nature.

Alec

[gentoo-user] Re: why --noclear not set on tty1 in default /etc/inittab?

[James]

James  tampabay.rr.com> writes:

> there is *no we* in nix unless your or I step up.
> Fair enough! ::

> git clone --bare https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/gli.gitCloning into bare
> repository 'gli.git'...
> fatal: repository 'https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/gli.git/' not found

> It'd be wonderfully appreciated if somebody (anybody) has those old
> installer sources anywhere I can replicate them for tweaking. 

SVEN created a wonderful repositor of old portage snapshots::


http://blog.siphos.be/2013/12/upgrading-old-gentoo-installations/

But, alas it has "disappeared" too?

Granted the posted reason is a failure of guidexml:

"Resource unavailable

The requested resource uses Gentoo's retired web publication system
GuideXML. As support for GuideXML was disabled on May 18, 2015, the resource
can not be displayed. We hope the author provides an updated version soon.  "


So there is no other way to publish archived portage tree snapshots?

Really?

Gentoo devs should at least appreciate the frustration the gentoo_commoners 
experience:: since it looks like the only automated installer we're
going to get on gentoo is DYI I'm ok with that but the simplest
path (IMHO) is to just start off where the 2009 installer left off.


After all, all the brilliant minds say that it cannot be be or should not be
done (create and automated gentoo installer).


James

gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org

[Rich Freeman]

On Sat, Aug 8, 2015 at 1:05 PM, walt  wrote:
> On Fri, 7 Aug 2015 19:41:27 -0400
> Rich Freeman  wrote:
>
>> The next
>> big change is likely to be virtualizing openrc so that it can be
>> uninstalled, and possibly not including it in the stage3, but that
>> hasn't really even been seriously discussed.  (Virtualizing it seems
>> almost certain to happen (IMHO) once the blockers are fixed,
>
> I just noticed that net-misc/netifrc installs two systemd service files,
> which puzzled me.  Is this in preparation for virtualizing openrc?
>

I doubt there is any relationship with that.  I imagine it is so that
you can still use netifrc to manage your interfaces under systemd.

-- 
Rich

[gentoo-user] Re: why --noclear not set on tty1 in default /etc/inittab?

[James]

Grant Edwards  gmail.com> writes:


> > I don't get why any distro leaves this out, why anyone wouldn't like to
> > automatically notice while booting any announcement that something failed,
> > especially someone who has just gotten a new installation up for the first
> > times. Why isn't --noclear set by default?

+1

> Yep, I find it infuriating that by default all distros seem to go to
> great effort to hide as much information about the boot/startup
> process as possible.  WTF?  Do they think that stuff is top secret or
> something?  Are they afraid they'll lose their jobs if that info gets
> out?

++1


It's even worse than you guys have stated. There is code often referred to
as "netconsol"::

I was/is wonderful for streaming concurrent detail about a system
during install, as soon as the ethernet interface is set::

https://www.kernel.org/doc/Documentation/networking/netconsole.txt


I'm not sure why it's not part of most installation semenatics::
I have posted numerous times to numerous forums about it and 
nothing ever happens. So now I have just decided to develop my own gentoo
installation  semantics. 

Dont misunderstand my position:: I think all those folks that have
writen/removed coded from the kernel and the distros are well intentioned
and honest folks. But, when you add up the entire ecosystem of what's
going on (insert your favorite conspiracy theories, as you like) the
days of average users being able to efficiently use open source
*nix technologies is fading fast. So like Alan has said (and many others)
there is *no we* in nix unless your or I step up.


Fair enough! ::

git clone --bare https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/gli.gitCloning into bare
repository 'gli.git'...
fatal: repository 'https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/gli.git/' not found



It'd be wonderfully appreciated if somebody (anybody) has those old
installer sources anywhere I can replicate them for tweaking. 


Note:: I intend to work on a variety of install semantics. ALL are welcome
to help, guide, critisize and encourage me on this journey!

Beware:: I'm old, crotchitee, dumb, dense  etc etc, and those are my
better qualities. My intentions are well intentioned.

(off to hoop_it_up to relieve some stress!)

If/when we get an installer(s) working for the commoners, we should 
start a gentoo-install  reflector so as to not hassle the gentoo_user
experts that do not believe in automated gentoo installs. These 'experts'
are really wonderful folks that have answered thosands of questions over the
years for folks:: and I thank them for that. 

But supporting the noob installers is more a job for the
post_noob_installers who just maybe are able to present a
kinder_gentler_mo_practical face on automated installation support.


PEACE,
James




sincerely,
James

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: why --noclear not set on tty1 in default /etc/inittab?

[Mick]

On Saturday 08 Aug 2015 18:02:00 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Aug 2015 16:00:29 + (UTC), Grant Edwards wrote:
> > Yep, I find it infuriating that by default all distros seem to go to
> > great effort to hide as much information about the boot/startup
> > process as possible.  WTF?  Do they think that stuff is top secret or
> > something?  Are they afraid they'll lose their jobs if that info gets
> > out?
> 
> No, they think that the type of user they are trying to attract is likely
> to be scared off by all that cryptic text scrolling by. They are probably
> right.
> 
> Gentoo doesn't hide it, it merely clears the screen once the boot has
> completed successfully. If the boot halts, you can see where and,
> usually, why it stopped. Try that with openUbundora.


Also on a server console you may not want anyone walking by to see what 
services you're running, what your IP address is, what NFS it's connecting to, 
etc.

Of course, for a home PC with a single user these concerns do not apply.
-- 
Regards,
Mick


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org

[walt]

On Fri, 7 Aug 2015 19:41:27 -0400
Rich Freeman  wrote:

> The next
> big change is likely to be virtualizing openrc so that it can be
> uninstalled, and possibly not including it in the stage3, but that
> hasn't really even been seriously discussed.  (Virtualizing it seems
> almost certain to happen (IMHO) once the blockers are fixed,

I just noticed that net-misc/netifrc installs two systemd service files,
which puzzled me.  Is this in preparation for virtualizing openrc?

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: why --noclear not set on tty1 in default /etc/inittab?

[Neil Bothwick]

On Sat, 8 Aug 2015 16:00:29 + (UTC), Grant Edwards wrote:

> Yep, I find it infuriating that by default all distros seem to go to
> great effort to hide as much information about the boot/startup
> process as possible.  WTF?  Do they think that stuff is top secret or
> something?  Are they afraid they'll lose their jobs if that info gets
> out?

No, they think that the type of user they are trying to attract is likely
to be scared off by all that cryptic text scrolling by. They are probably
right.

Gentoo doesn't hide it, it merely clears the screen once the boot has
completed successfully. If the boot halts, you can see where and,
usually, why it stopped. Try that with openUbundora.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

If a turtle doesn't have a shell, is he homeless or naked?


pgpxwUxuKdmXU.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

[gentoo-user] Re: why --noclear not set on tty1 in default /etc/inittab?

[Grant Edwards]

On 2015-08-08, Felix Miata  wrote:

> I don't get why any distro leaves this out, why anyone wouldn't like to
> automatically notice while booting any announcement that something failed,
> especially someone who has just gotten a new installation up for the first
> times. Why isn't --noclear set by default?

Yep, I find it infuriating that by default all distros seem to go to
great effort to hide as much information about the boot/startup
process as possible.  WTF?  Do they think that stuff is top secret or
something?  Are they afraid they'll lose their jobs if that info gets
out?

-- 
Grant

gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org

[James]

J. Rutkowski  kow.io> writes:


> > There was no installer other than the handbook.

OOppssee there was  I have several images::

livecd-amd64-installer-2008.0-r1.iso

> There was the former Gentoo installer project [1] but it was
> discontinued in 2009. The source is still available [2]

> [1] https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Installer/Old
> [2] https://gitweb.gentoo.org/proj/gli.git/about/


Yes the second link look to have some/all(?) the sources.

My GIT (kunf_fu) is more like Kung_pow_chicken.

I doubt that archive was origially on GIT?

Anyway could somebody post the steps to download/replicate the
entire rep0, say into a dir (/usr/local/portage/app-install/)


Just to make sure I dont screw things up a bit. I also
have many old (iso) images I found squirrelled away on my systems.

I do not know about these images, but they seem to be OK?

http://www.filewatcher.com/m/livecd-i686-installer-2008.0-r1.iso.721944576-0.html


Also, if you read muffblaster's pages, another dev was working on the
installer as recent at june 2015, in bash. He announced as the other
dev stopped working on the installer.

> J. Rutkowski 

THANKS!

James

Re: [gentoo-user] why --noclear not set on tty1 in default /etc/inittab?

[Alan McKinnon]

On 08/08/2015 14:26, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Sat, 08 Aug 2015 02:57:29 -0400, Felix Miata wrote:
> 
>> I don't get why any distro leaves this out, why anyone wouldn't like to
>> automatically notice while booting any announcement that something
>> failed, especially someone who has just gotten a new installation up
>> for the first times. Why isn't --noclear set by default?
> 
> It doesn't matter, it's just a default. This is Gentoo, it works how you
> tell it to work. That particular setting is even mentioned n the elog
> output.

I think Felix still has quite a bit of the SuSE/RHEL/Fedora/Ubuntu mindset.

Those distros do a lot of hand-holding, a lot of trying to figure out
what you mean, and take pride in delivering a full complete consistent
experience (whatever that is).

Gentoo has no truck with such things. The software is what it is, and if
the user doesn't like what is provided, the user must change it because
the dev ain't gonna. Just like Slackware come to think of it.

The Gentoo approach is that the user already knows what he/she wants and
knows how to get it. This is a perfectly valid approach - Gentoo users
rapidly move from n00b status to a different status of having a good
idea what they want. So the vast majority of Gentoo usage is done with
that knowledge in place, and very little usage is done in a state of "I
don't yet know what I'm doing".

This is what amuses me so much about efforts to make Gentoo "more
user-friendly" - whatever that is. Our devs cater to the overwhelming
majority case, and helpful guides on how to get there are at a minimum.

I like this approach for the same reason I prefer Linux over Windows.
Gentoo assumes I have a brain and can use it, and do not need to be
treated like a clueless n00b form now till the end of time. I find that
very validative and empowering, even though the prove I had to pay was 6
weeks of being mostly confused while getting up to speed. And that was
10 years ago.



>  
>> Once I set this and rebooted I saw several things that needed fixing
>> that I didn't have a clue about:
> 
> You really should enable logging to /var/log/rc.log and get into the
> habit of checking it when rebooting after a change. I always check it
> after booting a new kernel for instance.
> 
> 


-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckin...@gmail.com

gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org

[Neil Bothwick]

On Fri, 07 Aug 2015 20:32:48 -0500, J. Rutkowski wrote:

> > There was no installer other than the handbook.  
> 
> There was the former Gentoo installer project [1] but it was
> discontinued in 2009. The source is still available [2]

You have taken my statement out of context. It looks like I was saying
there was no installer at all, when the original post was clearly
discussing installation from the old GRP discs, which did not have an
installer.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Beware! The end is... 


pgpZU18Q4GRUv.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-user] why --noclear not set on tty1 in default /etc/inittab?

[Alan McKinnon]

On 08/08/2015 14:23, Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Sat, 8 Aug 2015 05:13:06 -0400, Fernando Rodriguez wrote:
> 
>> To remove safely now you should run:
>> emerge --deselect dev-haskell/hostname
>> followed by:
>> emerge --depclean
>>
>> That will remove it only if it's not needed by some other package.
> 
> Or emerge --depclean --ask --verbose dev-haskell/hostname
> 
> easier to type version
> 
> emerge -cav dev-haskell/hostname
> 
> 


Then install eix to hugely simplify the search process that should have
been done as step 1.

eix hostname

would have immediately shown that it is a Haskell package and unsuitable.

-- 
Alan McKinnon
alan.mckin...@gmail.com

Re: [gentoo-user] why --noclear not set on tty1 in default /etc/inittab?

[Neil Bothwick]

On Sat, 08 Aug 2015 02:57:29 -0400, Felix Miata wrote:

> I don't get why any distro leaves this out, why anyone wouldn't like to
> automatically notice while booting any announcement that something
> failed, especially someone who has just gotten a new installation up
> for the first times. Why isn't --noclear set by default?

It doesn't matter, it's just a default. This is Gentoo, it works how you
tell it to work. That particular setting is even mentioned n the elog
output.
 
> Once I set this and rebooted I saw several things that needed fixing
> that I didn't have a clue about:

You really should enable logging to /var/log/rc.log and get into the
habit of checking it when rebooting after a change. I always check it
after booting a new kernel for instance.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Dyslexics of the world, untie!


pgpIPyrXFB_DH.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-user] why --noclear not set on tty1 in default /etc/inittab?

[Neil Bothwick]

On Sat, 8 Aug 2015 05:13:06 -0400, Fernando Rodriguez wrote:

> To remove safely now you should run:
> emerge --deselect dev-haskell/hostname
> followed by:
> emerge --depclean
> 
> That will remove it only if it's not needed by some other package.

Or emerge --depclean --ask --verbose dev-haskell/hostname

easier to type version

emerge -cav dev-haskell/hostname


-- 
Neil Bothwick

A printer consists of three main parts: the case, the jammed paper tray
and the blinking red light.


pgp21oPEpE61G.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: [gentoo-user] why --noclear not set on tty1 in default /etc/inittab?

[Fernando Rodriguez]

On Saturday, August 08, 2015 4:55:03 AM Fernando Rodriguez wrote:
> On Saturday, August 08, 2015 4:45:06 AM Felix Miata wrote:
> > Fernando Rodriguez composed on 2015-08-08 03:43 (UTC-0400):
> > 
> > > Felix Miata wrote:
> > 
> > >> I don't get why any distro leaves this out, why anyone wouldn't like to
> > >> automatically notice while booting any announcement that something 
> failed,
> > >> especially someone who has just gotten a new installation up for the 
first
> > >> times. Why isn't --noclear set by default?
> > 
> > > Because it's your choice (and your job) to set it or not. Gentoo is not 
a 
> > > distro per se, it' more of a set of tools to help you build your own 
> system. 
> > > In most cases it provides whatever upstream ships with only patches and 
> fixes 
> > > as needed.
> > 
> > Understood, but there were actually two questions posed. You seem to have
> > answered only the second. Maybe Mick's answer addresses the first.
> > 
> > > There's also a logging setting on rc.conf that logs the boot process.
> > 
> > That's not an automatic tickler, only a log. Clearing tty1's init messages
> > has never ever made sense to me. IOW, they get put there by default, so 
why
> > not leave them there by default? If upstream's responsible for the default
> > clearing, why did it so choose?
> 
> Actually that one's provided by gentoo, point was it's just a preference, I 
> like it the way it is. Maybe some consider it a security issue as Mick 
stated 
> (I don't think it is).
>  
> > > The rest of your problems where due to failure to follow the handbook.
> > 
> > But did I need to emerge dev-haskell/hostname, or was another hostname
> > function already part of the base, and the haskell one something more or
> > different from built in?
> 
> No, you just needed to set it like you did (if you followed the wiki that 
you 
> posted, it's also in the handbook). I believe that file is part of openrc but 
> it doesn't get overwritten if you reinstall the package (none of the files on 
> /etc do). You need to run etc-update after emerging to update those files.

To remove safely now you should run:
emerge --deselect dev-haskell/hostname
followed by:
emerge --depclean

That will remove it only if it's not needed by some other package.

-- 
Fernando Rodriguez

Re: [gentoo-user] why --noclear not set on tty1 in default /etc/inittab?

[Fernando Rodriguez]

On Saturday, August 08, 2015 4:45:06 AM Felix Miata wrote:
> Fernando Rodriguez composed on 2015-08-08 03:43 (UTC-0400):
> 
> > Felix Miata wrote:
> 
> >> I don't get why any distro leaves this out, why anyone wouldn't like to
> >> automatically notice while booting any announcement that something 
failed,
> >> especially someone who has just gotten a new installation up for the first
> >> times. Why isn't --noclear set by default?
> 
> > Because it's your choice (and your job) to set it or not. Gentoo is not a 
> > distro per se, it' more of a set of tools to help you build your own 
system. 
> > In most cases it provides whatever upstream ships with only patches and 
fixes 
> > as needed.
> 
> Understood, but there were actually two questions posed. You seem to have
> answered only the second. Maybe Mick's answer addresses the first.
> 
> > There's also a logging setting on rc.conf that logs the boot process.
> 
> That's not an automatic tickler, only a log. Clearing tty1's init messages
> has never ever made sense to me. IOW, they get put there by default, so why
> not leave them there by default? If upstream's responsible for the default
> clearing, why did it so choose?

Actually that one's provided by gentoo, point was it's just a preference, I 
like it the way it is. Maybe some consider it a security issue as Mick stated 
(I don't think it is).
 
> > The rest of your problems where due to failure to follow the handbook.
> 
> But did I need to emerge dev-haskell/hostname, or was another hostname
> function already part of the base, and the haskell one something more or
> different from built in?

No, you just needed to set it like you did (if you followed the wiki that you 
posted, it's also in the handbook). I believe that file is part of openrc but 
it doesn't get overwritten if you reinstall the package (none of the files on 
/etc do). You need to run etc-update after emerging to update those files.


-- 
Fernando Rodriguez

Re: [gentoo-user] why --noclear not set on tty1 in default /etc/inittab?

[Felix Miata]

Fernando Rodriguez composed on 2015-08-08 03:43 (UTC-0400):

> Felix Miata wrote:

>> I don't get why any distro leaves this out, why anyone wouldn't like to
>> automatically notice while booting any announcement that something failed,
>> especially someone who has just gotten a new installation up for the first
>> times. Why isn't --noclear set by default?

> Because it's your choice (and your job) to set it or not. Gentoo is not a 
> distro per se, it' more of a set of tools to help you build your own system. 
> In most cases it provides whatever upstream ships with only patches and fixes 
> as needed.

Understood, but there were actually two questions posed. You seem to have
answered only the second. Maybe Mick's answer addresses the first.

> There's also a logging setting on rc.conf that logs the boot process.

That's not an automatic tickler, only a log. Clearing tty1's init messages
has never ever made sense to me. IOW, they get put there by default, so why
not leave them there by default? If upstream's responsible for the default
clearing, why did it so choose?

> The rest of your problems where due to failure to follow the handbook.

But did I need to emerge dev-haskell/hostname, or was another hostname
function already part of the base, and the haskell one something more or
different from built in?
-- 
"The wise are known for their understanding, and pleasant
words are persuasive." Proverbs 16:21 (New Living Translation)

 Team OS/2 ** Reg. Linux User #211409 ** a11y rocks!

Felix Miata  ***  http://fm.no-ip.com/

Re: [gentoo-user] why --noclear not set on tty1 in default /etc/inittab?

[Fernando Rodriguez]

On Saturday, August 08, 2015 2:57:29 AM Felix Miata wrote:
> I don't get why any distro leaves this out, why anyone wouldn't like to
> automatically notice while booting any announcement that something failed,
> especially someone who has just gotten a new installation up for the first
> times. Why isn't --noclear set by default?

Because it's your choice (and your job) to set it or not. Gentoo is not a 
distro per se, it' more of a set of tools to help you build your own system. 
In most cases it provides whatever upstream ships with only patches and fixes 
as needed. There's also a logging setting on rc.conf that logs the boot 
process.

The rest of your problems where due to failure to follow the handbook.

> 
> Once I set this and rebooted I saw several things that needed fixing that I
> didn't have a clue about:
> 
> 1-error loading /etc/.../hostname (I had copied it from openSUSE 
installation
> instead of following installation instruction, and without reading or saving
> the existing one)
> 
> 2-depending on hostname working, syslog-ng fails to start
> 
> 3-missing mount points
> 
> As a consequence of my ineptitude (and prior to reading
> http://www.gentoo-wiki.info/FQDN) I did emerge -s hostname, found a package
> by that name, and chose to emerge it. 30 minutes later, it and 3 dep 
packages
> were still compiling, lots lots longer than a kernel compile. :-(
> 

-- 
Fernando Rodriguez

Re: [gentoo-user] why --noclear not set on tty1 in default /etc/inittab?

[Mick]

On Saturday 08 Aug 2015 07:57:29 Felix Miata wrote:
> I don't get why any distro leaves this out, why anyone wouldn't like to
> automatically notice while booting any announcement that something failed,
> especially someone who has just gotten a new installation up for the first
> times. Why isn't --noclear set by default?

It used to be the default, but a 4-5 years ago it changed.  I think the devs 
decided to change sysvinit, probably for security reasons.


> Once I set this and rebooted I saw several things that needed fixing that I
> didn't have a clue about:
> 
> 1-error loading /etc/.../hostname (I had copied it from openSUSE
> installation instead of following installation instruction, and without
> reading or saving the existing one)
> 
> 2-depending on hostname working, syslog-ng fails to start
> 
> 3-missing mount points
> 
> As a consequence of my ineptitude (and prior to reading
> http://www.gentoo-wiki.info/FQDN) 

This is a really old archive, so anything you read there should not be taken 
as gospel, it may well have been deprecated.  The current Gentoo wiki is at:

https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Main_Page


> I did emerge -s hostname, found a package
> by that name, and chose to emerge it. 30 minutes later, it and 3 dep
> packages were still compiling, lots lots longer than a kernel compile. :-(

-- 
Regards,
Mick


signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.

Re: [gentoo-user] [OT]: Optimal formatting a SDcard (64GB) with partions of diffent sizes and filesystems?

[Meino . Cramer]

Fernando Rodriguez  [15-08-08 05:43]:
> On Friday, August 07, 2015 9:44:50 PM meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote:
> > Mick  [15-08-07 20:04]:
> > > On Friday 07 Aug 2015 04:27:15 Fernando Rodriguez wrote:
> > > > On Thursday, August 06, 2015 6:18:59 PM meino.cra...@gmx.de wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > > 
> > > > > for my tablet PC I used a used 32GB FAT32 formatted SDcard. The
> > > > > formatting was already done by the manufacturer.
> > > > > Then I screwed it up and had to do the partioning and formatting
> > > > > myself again. "No big deal", I thought -- and was wrong.
> > > > > Yes, the "thing" I got could be read and written. But it was
> > > > > DAMN slow in comparison to the original formatting.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I googled and found a description, which described exactly,
> > > > > what I wanted: An optimal formatting for one big FAT32 partion.
> > > > > I did it again ;) and: TADA! The speed was back.
> > > > > LINK:http://zero1-st.blogspot.de/2012/05/formatting-fat32-volumes-larger->
> > > > >  > than.html
> > > > > 
> > > > > Now I need the something identical but explained in a way
> > > > > that it can be successfully applied to any partion layout
> > > > > and any SDcard size.
> > > > > Currently the new SDcard has 64GB (yes, the tablet eats that size
> > > > > well :) and needs at least two partions: One FAT32 and one ext4.
> > > > > May be that I need a different layout later.
> > > > > 
> > > > > To what aspect and "logic" do I have to keep my eyes on, when
> > > > > it comes partioning/formatting any SDcard size with any partion
> > > > > layout and any filesystem?
> > > > > 
> > > > > Thank you very much in advance for any help!
> > > > > Best regards,
> > > > > Meino
> > > > 
> > > > I wrote a long reply to this and it appears to have been swallowed by
> > > > /dev/null.
> > > > 
> > > > SD cards don't have 128K blocks. Except for the very early ones 
> (standard
> > > > capacity), they are divided in allocation units (AU) that are 1MB to 4MB
> > > > for SDHC and even larger for SDXC. The only way to get that value is by
> > > > reading a register in the card (so you can't do it in usermode on 
> linux).
> > > > 
> > > > The AUs are divided into Recording Units (RUs). The size of these can be
> > > > deduced from the card speed class (that's the number inside the C on the
> > > > label), and the card capacity. For class 2 and 4 if the card is less 
> than
> > > > 1GB it's 16KB, otherwise it's 32KB. For class 6 it is 64KB, and for 
> class
> > > > 10 it's 512KB.
> > > > 
> > > > After an AU is erased you can write to any of the free RUs in any order 
> in
> > > > blocks of 512 bytes sequentially (the block size is configurable by the
> > > > driver but 512 is the most common). But if you write to a nonfree RU 
> then
> > > > all non- free RU get copied to a new AU. So the performance hit depends 
> on
> > > > how many non-free RUs are in the AU when this happens.
> > > > 
> > > > So to get the best performance you need to align the first FAT cluster 
> > > > on
> > > > an AU boundary and that the RUs used by the reserved sectors after the 
> FAT
> > > > are free. This is not so easy from usermode because you can't get the AU
> > > > size and you can't erase the AU to make sure reserved sectors are free.
> > > > The Windows 7 and later format utility will do it if you don't partition
> > > > the card. The next best thing is to align it to an RU which should be
> > > > pretty easy.
> > > > 
> > > > You could guess the AU size by writting blocks of RU size from the 
> > > > start 
> of
> > > > the card and timing it. Every time you hit the AU boundary there will 
> > > > be 
> a
> > > > longer delay.
> > > > 
> > > > For more details see the SD specification (chapter 4.13).
> > > > 
> > > > https://www.sdcard.org/downloads/pls/
> > > > 
> > > > They also have formatter tools for Windows and OSX. I tried the Windows
> > > > version years ago but had problems with it (can't remember what).
> > > 
> > > Excellent information Fernando, thank you!
> > > 
> > > So there is no tool for me to use to read the AU/RU on the chip?
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > Hi,
> > 
> > sorry for being a little late...was too busy and my sdcard is still
> > not formatted... ;)
> > 
> > Thank you very much for the help and all the informations. Currently I
> > start to understand the problems and solutions in formatting ONE
> > partition with a FAT32 filesystem on a sdcard the correct way, but 
> > when it comes to more the one partition and filesystems for example
> > like ext4fs I still dont know how to...
> > 
> > Just a few minutes before I found this:
> > http://www.bradfordembedded.com/2014/05/flashbenching/
> > http://wiki.laptop.org/go/How_to_Damage_a_FLASH_Storage_Device
> > https://github.com/bradfa/flashbench
> > http://wiki.laptop.org/go/SDCard_Testing
> > https://lists.linaro.org/pipermail/flashbench-results/
> > https://blogofterje.wordpress.com/2012/01/14/optimizing-fs-on-sd-card/
> > 
> > I am still in the process o