Re: [gentoo-user] Reproducible Installation Lists?

[Ramces Tampo-og Red]

Wol  writes:
> On 26/02/2022 22:14, Ramces Tampo-og Red wrote:
>> I see. I  will be wary of my  world file from now on. I'm  glad that you
>> mentioned this now  since I don't have that much  packages installed yet
>> and I haven't played around with the system enough that there's a chance
>> that it might break. Knowing this is  really handy since it might not be
>> apparent when things that shouldn't be added in the world file are being
>> added to the world file.
>
> If you think you might have been guilty of this, just edit your world 
> file with vim or whatever, delete everything you don't recognise or you 
> recognise as having been done for troubleshooting, and save it. It won't 
> make any difference to your running system. Just be careful not to 
> delete by accident stuff you really did want (although you could always 
> re-emerge it).
>

Coming from a  binary-based distribution, this stuff is  just pure magic
to me.  I feel  like I'm  just now  learning how  to actually  manage my
system. This made me  think, would it be possible to  trim my world file
and sort  them into sets? I'm  digging the possibility of  being able to
only update groups of packages that I want to.

I've been struggling with updates  lately since I've emerged qutebrowser
and updates to qtwebengine is brutal to my X200. I haven't set-up distcc
yet and the  hard drive in this  poor thing isn't enough to  cover for a
decently sized ccache.

So I'm wondering whether  it would be feasible to just  move some of the
contents of the  world file into sets and just  manage the packages that
way.

> Then try an "emerge --depclean --pretend" and see what would be removed. 
> Last time I did that, I then manually -C'd each package in turn - not 
> least because I need to update my kernel an d depclean buggers that up 
> if you're not careful ... always do an emerge, build new kernel, 
> depclean quickly, in that order, with no sync in the middle! Otherwise 
> you might end up cursing ...
>

Yeah, I  can see why that  would be a problem  if you did a  sync in the
middle.

> The other thing is, (and it's probably already been mentioned,) is make 
> sure you know how to use package.use and package.accept. Don't add 
> things like ~amd to our global settings, just add them freely for 
> VERSIONED stuff in those directories. Then as updates come along, all 
> your changes get left behind as "no longer necessary".
>
> I learnt this the hard way, I enabled ~amd for a package that had no 
> stable versions, that required a new ~amd version of glibc, that then 
> blocked any attempt to update my system! So there was a trail of 
> messages on this list as I worked out how to fix the mess :-)
>
> By putting all this stuff in package.accept and package.use, I can keep 
> track, and if the file is old it's probably out of date and ripe for 
> deletion. I can just move it out the way, try an update, and if it blows 
> up look what's in the file I've moved to see what I need to keep and 
> what cruft can be deleted.
>

Oh  man, I  did this  once!  I added  ~amd64  as a  global variable  and
everything updated. I didn't realize the folly of what I did until I saw
that gcc is  being rebuilt. I think  I've gone a little  bit wiser since
then (hopefully).

> Cheers,
> Wol
>

Thank you for the really helpful tips!

Cheers!

-- 
   .  *+   
  +   Ang kalayaan ay dili gihatag, ini'y giabot.   
   *   + {gopher,gemini}://kalayaan.xyz*   
   .  C4AE 5D53 46A0 01DF 6E92  CB46 92D7 9FBB AB9F 3E37 .


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-user] Reproducible Installation Lists?

[Wol]

On 26/02/2022 22:14, Ramces Tampo-og Red wrote:

I see. I  will be wary of my  world file from now on. I'm  glad that you
mentioned this now  since I don't have that much  packages installed yet
and I haven't played around with the system enough that there's a chance
that it might break. Knowing this is  really handy since it might not be
apparent when things that shouldn't be added in the world file are being
added to the world file.


If you think you might have been guilty of this, just edit your world 
file with vim or whatever, delete everything you don't recognise or you 
recognise as having been done for troubleshooting, and save it. It won't 
make any difference to your running system. Just be careful not to 
delete by accident stuff you really did want (although you could always 
re-emerge it).


Then try an "emerge --depclean --pretend" and see what would be removed. 
Last time I did that, I then manually -C'd each package in turn - not 
least because I need to update my kernel an d depclean buggers that up 
if you're not careful ... always do an emerge, build new kernel, 
depclean quickly, in that order, with no sync in the middle! Otherwise 
you might end up cursing ...


The other thing is, (and it's probably already been mentioned,) is make 
sure you know how to use package.use and package.accept. Don't add 
things like ~amd to our global settings, just add them freely for 
VERSIONED stuff in those directories. Then as updates come along, all 
your changes get left behind as "no longer necessary".


I learnt this the hard way, I enabled ~amd for a package that had no 
stable versions, that required a new ~amd version of glibc, that then 
blocked any attempt to update my system! So there was a trail of 
messages on this list as I worked out how to fix the mess :-)


By putting all this stuff in package.accept and package.use, I can keep 
track, and if the file is old it's probably out of date and ripe for 
deletion. I can just move it out the way, try an update, and if it blows 
up look what's in the file I've moved to see what I need to keep and 
what cruft can be deleted.


Cheers,
Wol

Re: [gentoo-user] Reproducible Installation Lists?

[Ramces Tampo-og Red]

Peter Humphrey  writes:

> On Saturday, 26 February 2022 14:19:15 GMT Ramces Tampo-og Red wrote:
>
> --->8
>
>> After reading the responses in the thread, this appears to be one way to
>> do it. Though I think adding it to a set could be a cleaner way? I
>> haven't tried all of the suggestions yet.
>
> In passing, I thought I'd mention that I keep most of my packages in sets: 
> core, base, xorg, plasma, apps and utils. My world file only gets used for 
> temporary or experimental things: it has one entry at the moment.
>

This is very interesting. I've read a bit about sets a while ago and I'd
say I should really try it out.

> I did that because of the frequency of reinstalling the system during the 
> worst of plasma's instability.
>
>> > Oh - and for quite a while I used the -b -k flags a lot, mostly emerging
>> > on the slower system actually then installing the binary on the fast
>> > one. Sounds odd, but the faster, newer system had a habit of crashing
>> > during an emerge ... Both systems now gone to the Computer Centre in the
>> > Sky :-)
>> 
>> That is certainly odd. You would assume that the faster system would be
>> the one compiling stuff for the slower one. I've been thinking of buying
>> a couple of old desktops for the sole purpose of being distcc slaves but
>> I don't know how much that would improve the compile times.
>
> Counter-intuitive, to say the least, and certainly not the way I do it.
>

Yeah, I was just thinking about that since building a powerful, new
computer around my area is prohibitively expensive. But getting old,
prebuilt computers is ludicrously cheap. I figured that I can get a few
of them for $50-75 and just plug them to an ethernet switch to do the
compiling for me.

> -- 
> Regards,
> Peter.
>
>
>
>

-- 
   .  *+   
  +   Ang kalayaan ay dili gihatag, ini'y giabot.   
   *   + {gopher,gemini}://kalayaan.xyz*   
   .  C4AE 5D53 46A0 01DF 6E92  CB46 92D7 9FBB AB9F 3E37 .


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-user] Reproducible Installation Lists?

[Dale]

Ramces Tampo-og Red wrote:
> Dale  writes:
>
>> Tasytea has a good idea on using sets if you prefer that way.  I rarely
>> use sets but a lot of people love them.  It does have benefits but it
>> just isn't for me. 
>>
> I am actually very interested with  sets. I haven't read enough about it
> though. But  I think  I will try  it out,  it might be  a neater  way of
> dealing with packages.
>
>> Hope that helps.
>>
>> Dale
>>
>> :-)  :-)
>>
> It certainly did!
>
> Cheers :-)
>

If sets were available when I started and I used from the beginning, I
may like using them more.  I'm just so used to doing it the way I've
done it for ages that I don't use them.  I did at one point when, I
think it was KDE anyway, was making some major changes and I updated
everything but KDE and only updated KDE when I felt there was a more
stable release.  May have been the KDE3 to KDE4 mess.  If you start
using it now, you may fall in love with like a lot of others have. 

On the --oneshot option, I get all my stuff installed and before I do my
first update, a couple weeks later, I add the option to make.conf.  Then
if I want to install something that I use, I add --select y so it adds
to the world file.  As a starting point, this is my emerge defaults from
make.conf:

EMERGE_DEFAULT_OPTS="--with-bdeps y --backtrack=100 --keep-going -v
--quiet-build=y -1 --unordered-display"

That generally gives me a stable system even tho I run unstable on a lot
of packages.  You can add or remove as you see fit.  May make a good
starting point is all.  You may also want to look into the following
options in make.conf if you haven't already:

MAKEOPTS
FEATURES
PORTAGE_NICENESS
PORTAGE_IONICE_COMMAND

All those are good to set but it depends on your system what to set them
at.  Generally, CPU abilities and memory determine that. 

Dale

:-)  :-) 

Re: [gentoo-user] Reproducible Installation Lists?

[Ramces Tampo-og Red]

Dale  writes:
> Ramces Tampo-og Red wrote:
>> Dale  writes:
>>
>>> Since you mention being new to Gentoo, don't forget the --oneshot or -1
>>> option when emerging things that should not be in the world file. 
>>> Libraries are one thing that should rarely if ever be in that file. 
>>> Once you get your install done and rarely install new packages, you can
>>> add that to the defaults in make.conf.  When I first started using
>>> Gentoo, I was bad to forget the -1 option and my world file was a mess. 
>>> It can lead to all sorts of problems later on.  The only entries in the
>>> world file should be packages you install and use directly.  It's rare
>>> that anything else should be there. 
>>>
>> Wait. Does this mean doing an emerge --ask foo-libs/lib or do you mean
>> the stuff that were pulled alongside packages? Since I do think that the
>> packages that I've installed certainly pulled libraries too.
>>
>>> Happy Gentooing. 
>>>
>>> Dale
>>>
>>> :-)  :-) 
>>>
>> Cheers, you too!
>>
>
>
> Let's say you run the command emerge firefox because you plan to use it
> as a web browser.  It is very likely that it will pull in other packages
> that it needs to work.  But, emerge only records firefox in the world
> file as that is what you asked for.  When firefox updates later, emerge
> will find the update and if needed, pull in updates to packages it
> depends on that are required.  It may have several, it may not but none
> of those should be in world.  Only things you emerge should go in the
> world file.
>
> The way the world file gets things in it that shouldn't be there is when
> you run into a issue updating.  Let's say you sync and emerge can't find
> a clear path to update.  What most of us do is update in smaller parts
> one or two packages at a time.  Sometimes you may have to unmerge a
> package and emerge something else to help emerge along.  As you are
> doing that, you should use -1 for packages that you didn't install
> yourself such as Firefox.  One package that comes to mind is harfbuzz. 
> There's another that goes with that but I forget the name.  If you run
> into that, those are packages other things depend on and they shouldn't
> be in the world file.  So, while getting around that, use the -1
> option.  In short, things like Firefox, libreoffice, digikam, okular and
> such are what belongs in world providing your aren't using a meta
> package that pulls them in.  Things those packages depend on should be
> managed by emerge itself during normal updates. 
>
> Some one else may can explain that better.  Sometimes a different view
> makes things clearer. 
>
> I just wish I knew some of that when I first started.  I started running
> into update problems and someone pointed out I should check my world
> file.  It was full of stuff that shouldn't be there and some even had
> versions which prevented updates.  It took me a while but I got it
> cleaned up and things worked fine.  That's when I added -1 to
> make.conf.  I've had a clean world file ever since. 
>

I see. I  will be wary of my  world file from now on. I'm  glad that you
mentioned this now  since I don't have that much  packages installed yet
and I haven't played around with the system enough that there's a chance
that it might break. Knowing this is  really handy since it might not be
apparent when things that shouldn't be added in the world file are being
added to the world file.

> Tasytea has a good idea on using sets if you prefer that way.  I rarely
> use sets but a lot of people love them.  It does have benefits but it
> just isn't for me. 
>

I am actually very interested with  sets. I haven't read enough about it
though. But  I think  I will try  it out,  it might be  a neater  way of
dealing with packages.

> Hope that helps.
>
> Dale
>
> :-)  :-)
>

It certainly did!

Cheers :-)

-- 
   .  *+   
  +   Ang kalayaan ay dili gihatag, ini'y giabot.   
   *   + {gopher,gemini}://kalayaan.xyz*   
   .  C4AE 5D53 46A0 01DF 6E92  CB46 92D7 9FBB AB9F 3E37 .


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-user] Reproducible Installation Lists?

[Dale]

Ramces Tampo-og Red wrote:
> Dale  writes:
>
>> Since you mention being new to Gentoo, don't forget the --oneshot or -1
>> option when emerging things that should not be in the world file. 
>> Libraries are one thing that should rarely if ever be in that file. 
>> Once you get your install done and rarely install new packages, you can
>> add that to the defaults in make.conf.  When I first started using
>> Gentoo, I was bad to forget the -1 option and my world file was a mess. 
>> It can lead to all sorts of problems later on.  The only entries in the
>> world file should be packages you install and use directly.  It's rare
>> that anything else should be there. 
>>
> Wait. Does this mean doing an emerge --ask foo-libs/lib or do you mean
> the stuff that were pulled alongside packages? Since I do think that the
> packages that I've installed certainly pulled libraries too.
>
>> Happy Gentooing. 
>>
>> Dale
>>
>> :-)  :-) 
>>
> Cheers, you too!
>


Let's say you run the command emerge firefox because you plan to use it
as a web browser.  It is very likely that it will pull in other packages
that it needs to work.  But, emerge only records firefox in the world
file as that is what you asked for.  When firefox updates later, emerge
will find the update and if needed, pull in updates to packages it
depends on that are required.  It may have several, it may not but none
of those should be in world.  Only things you emerge should go in the
world file.

The way the world file gets things in it that shouldn't be there is when
you run into a issue updating.  Let's say you sync and emerge can't find
a clear path to update.  What most of us do is update in smaller parts
one or two packages at a time.  Sometimes you may have to unmerge a
package and emerge something else to help emerge along.  As you are
doing that, you should use -1 for packages that you didn't install
yourself such as Firefox.  One package that comes to mind is harfbuzz. 
There's another that goes with that but I forget the name.  If you run
into that, those are packages other things depend on and they shouldn't
be in the world file.  So, while getting around that, use the -1
option.  In short, things like Firefox, libreoffice, digikam, okular and
such are what belongs in world providing your aren't using a meta
package that pulls them in.  Things those packages depend on should be
managed by emerge itself during normal updates. 

Some one else may can explain that better.  Sometimes a different view
makes things clearer. 

I just wish I knew some of that when I first started.  I started running
into update problems and someone pointed out I should check my world
file.  It was full of stuff that shouldn't be there and some even had
versions which prevented updates.  It took me a while but I got it
cleaned up and things worked fine.  That's when I added -1 to
make.conf.  I've had a clean world file ever since. 

Tasytea has a good idea on using sets if you prefer that way.  I rarely
use sets but a lot of people love them.  It does have benefits but it
just isn't for me. 

Hope that helps.

Dale

:-)  :-)

Re: [gentoo-user] Reproducible Installation Lists?

[Peter Humphrey]

On Saturday, 26 February 2022 14:19:15 GMT Ramces Tampo-og Red wrote:

--->8

> After reading the responses in the thread, this appears to be one way to
> do it. Though I think adding it to a set could be a cleaner way? I
> haven't tried all of the suggestions yet.

In passing, I thought I'd mention that I keep most of my packages in sets: 
core, base, xorg, plasma, apps and utils. My world file only gets used for 
temporary or experimental things: it has one entry at the moment.

I did that because of the frequency of reinstalling the system during the 
worst of plasma's instability.

> > Oh - and for quite a while I used the -b -k flags a lot, mostly emerging
> > on the slower system actually then installing the binary on the fast
> > one. Sounds odd, but the faster, newer system had a habit of crashing
> > during an emerge ... Both systems now gone to the Computer Centre in the
> > Sky :-)
> 
> That is certainly odd. You would assume that the faster system would be
> the one compiling stuff for the slower one. I've been thinking of buying
> a couple of old desktops for the sole purpose of being distcc slaves but
> I don't know how much that would improve the compile times.

Counter-intuitive, to say the least, and certainly not the way I do it.

-- 
Regards,
Peter.

Re: [gentoo-user] Reproducible Installation Lists?

[Peter Humphrey]

On Saturday, 26 February 2022 12:10:49 GMT Michael wrote:

> This is the page which explains how to build binary packages on one host and
> then install them on other PCs, without having to re-complile/rebuild them
> from source:
> 
> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Binary_package_guide
> 
> It saves a lot of time, especially if you want to update slower machines.

I've been using this method, or something very like it, for 10 years or more. 
My workstation does all the compiling of packages, with the client box's 
portage directory exported to it over NFS. Then the client has only to unzip 
the package and install the files. Well, of course it has to run all its 
dependency calculations first, but provided that I keep the systems in step 
that's all it has to do.

Feel free to ask about any wrinkles you'd like help with.

-- 
Regards,
Peter.

Re: [gentoo-user] Reproducible Installation Lists?

[tastytea]

On 2022-02-26 14:12+ Wols Lists  wrote:

> On 26/02/2022 13:20, Ramces Tampo-og Red wrote:
> >> This is the page which explains how to build binary packages on
> >> one host and then install them on other PCs, without having to
> >> re-complile/rebuild them from source:
> >>
> >> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Binary_package_guide
> >>
> >> It saves a lot of time, especially if you want to update slower
> >> machines.  
> > Thanks! I've been thinking of doing something like this too or
> > probably distcc. But yeah, I'll check this out.  
> 
> Ummm ...
> 
> I notice it requires portage 3.0.31.
> 
> My system (updated last week) is on 3.0.30. So it's VERY new, I
> presume ...

3.0.31 is only required for the new format (GPKG). Binary packages are
supported since at least 2011 (the first version of the linked article
is from 2011-10-12).

Re: [gentoo-user] Reproducible Installation Lists?

[Ramces Tampo-og Red]

Wols Lists  writes:
> On 26/02/2022 11:07, Dale wrote:
>> Ramces Tampo-og Red wrote:
>>> Hello list,
>>>
>>> I'm a sort-of  newbie gentoo user and  I just wanted to ask  if what I'm
>>> thinking is possible or if I'm just  being stupid. But either way, I was
>>> wondering if it  is possible to export a list  of all installed software
>>> in emerge and use that to recreate on another gentoo install.
>>>
>>> I have  a bunch of PCs  that are all  similarly specced and I  wanted to
>>> create a minimal install "template" for all of them. If not, would it be
>>> possible to pipe-in to emerge from stdin an output of all of the package
>>> names that I wanted it to emerge?
>>>
>>> I'm really sorry if this might  be a stupid question. I'd appreciate any
>>> guidance in the matter.
>>>
>>> Cheers!
>>>
>> 
>> There is a file that contains all the packages you have installed.  It
>> is located here:
>> 
>> /var/lib/portage/world
>> 
>> One could copy that file to another system and do a emerge @world to
>> install the same list of packages.  Depending on what all you have
>> installed, it could confuse emerge and not be doable.  In the past, I
>> had a copy of the file and I emerged them a few at a time.  It's worth
>> trying by just coping the file tho.  It just might work.
>
> Someone a while ago gave me a tip along the lines of
>
> emerge < /var/lib/portage/world
>
> I was building a new system and they said this was a good way of getting 
> the new system to have the same packages as the old one. Mind you, I 
> think I'd now rather just print off @world and be choosy in what I 
> re-emerge.
>

After reading the responses in the thread, this appears to be one way to
do it. Though I think adding it to a set could be a cleaner way? I
haven't tried all of the suggestions yet.

> Oh - and for quite a while I used the -b -k flags a lot, mostly emerging 
> on the slower system actually then installing the binary on the fast 
> one. Sounds odd, but the faster, newer system had a habit of crashing 
> during an emerge ... Both systems now gone to the Computer Centre in the 
> Sky :-)
>

That is certainly odd. You would assume that the faster system would be
the one compiling stuff for the slower one. I've been thinking of buying
a couple of old desktops for the sole purpose of being distcc slaves but
I don't know how much that would improve the compile times.

> Cheers,
> Wol
>

Cheers!

-- 
   .  *+   
  +   Ang kalayaan ay dili gihatag, ini'y giabot.   
   *   + {gopher,gemini}://kalayaan.xyz*   
   .  C4AE 5D53 46A0 01DF 6E92  CB46 92D7 9FBB AB9F 3E37 .


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-user] Reproducible Installation Lists?

[Wols Lists]

On 26/02/2022 13:20, Ramces Tampo-og Red wrote:

This is the page which explains how to build binary packages on one host and
then install them on other PCs, without having to re-complile/rebuild them
from source:

https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Binary_package_guide

It saves a lot of time, especially if you want to update slower machines.

Thanks! I've been thinking of doing something like this too or probably
distcc. But yeah, I'll check this out.


Ummm ...

I notice it requires portage 3.0.31.

My system (updated last week) is on 3.0.30. So it's VERY new, I presume ...

Cheers,
Wol

Re: [gentoo-user] Reproducible Installation Lists?

[Ramces Tampo-og Red]

Michael  writes:

> On Saturday, 26 February 2022 12:07:40 GMT Ramces Tampo-og Red wrote:
>> spareproject776  writes:
>> > On Sat, Feb 26, 2022 at 06:47:12PM +0800, Ramces Tampo-og Red wrote:
>> >> Hello list,
>> >> 
>> >> I'm a sort-of  newbie gentoo user and  I just wanted to ask  if what I'm
>> >> thinking is possible or if I'm just  being stupid. But either way, I was
>> >> wondering if it  is possible to export a list  of all installed software
>> >> in emerge and use that to recreate on another gentoo install.
>> >> 
>> >> I have  a bunch of PCs  that are all  similarly specced and I  wanted to
>> >> create a minimal install "template" for all of them. If not, would it be
>> >> possible to pipe-in to emerge from stdin an output of all of the package
>> >> names that I wanted it to emerge?
>> >> 
>> >> I'm really sorry if this might  be a stupid question. I'd appreciate any
>> >> guidance in the matter.
>> >> 
>> >> Cheers!
>> > 
>> > emerge -avbk $(tr '\n' ' ' < /var/lib/portage/world)
>> > 
>> > If your doing more than one box binhost / binpkg has a far higher return
>> > for alot more effort upfront provided you can live with -mtune=generic.
>> 
>> Thanks! I will check this out.
>
> This is the page which explains how to build binary packages on one host and 
> then install them on other PCs, without having to re-complile/rebuild them 
> from source:
>
> https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Binary_package_guide
>
> It saves a lot of time, especially if you want to update slower machines.

Thanks! I've been thinking of doing something like this too or probably
distcc. But yeah, I'll check this out.

-- 
   .  *+   
  +   Ang kalayaan ay dili gihatag, ini'y giabot.   
   *   + {gopher,gemini}://kalayaan.xyz*   
   .  C4AE 5D53 46A0 01DF 6E92  CB46 92D7 9FBB AB9F 3E37 .


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-user] Reproducible Installation Lists?

[Wols Lists]

On 26/02/2022 11:07, Dale wrote:

Ramces Tampo-og Red wrote:

Hello list,

I'm a sort-of  newbie gentoo user and  I just wanted to ask  if what I'm
thinking is possible or if I'm just  being stupid. But either way, I was
wondering if it  is possible to export a list  of all installed software
in emerge and use that to recreate on another gentoo install.

I have  a bunch of PCs  that are all  similarly specced and I  wanted to
create a minimal install "template" for all of them. If not, would it be
possible to pipe-in to emerge from stdin an output of all of the package
names that I wanted it to emerge?

I'm really sorry if this might  be a stupid question. I'd appreciate any
guidance in the matter.

Cheers!



There is a file that contains all the packages you have installed.  It
is located here:

/var/lib/portage/world

One could copy that file to another system and do a emerge @world to
install the same list of packages.  Depending on what all you have
installed, it could confuse emerge and not be doable.  In the past, I
had a copy of the file and I emerged them a few at a time.  It's worth
trying by just coping the file tho.  It just might work.


Someone a while ago gave me a tip along the lines of

emerge < /var/lib/portage/world

I was building a new system and they said this was a good way of getting 
the new system to have the same packages as the old one. Mind you, I 
think I'd now rather just print off @world and be choosy in what I 
re-emerge.


Oh - and for quite a while I used the -b -k flags a lot, mostly emerging 
on the slower system actually then installing the binary on the fast 
one. Sounds odd, but the faster, newer system had a habit of crashing 
during an emerge ... Both systems now gone to the Computer Centre in the 
Sky :-)


Cheers,
Wol

Re: [gentoo-user] Reproducible Installation Lists?

[Ramces Tampo-og Red]

tastytea  writes:
> On 2022-02-26 05:07-0600 Dale  wrote:
>
>> Ramces Tampo-og Red wrote:
>> > Hello list,
>> >
>> > I'm a sort-of  newbie gentoo user and  I just wanted to ask  if
>> > what I'm thinking is possible or if I'm just  being stupid. But
>> > either way, I was wondering if it  is possible to export a list  of
>> > all installed software in emerge and use that to recreate on
>> > another gentoo install.
>> >
>> > I have  a bunch of PCs  that are all  similarly specced and I
>> > wanted to create a minimal install "template" for all of them. If
>> > not, would it be possible to pipe-in to emerge from stdin an output
>> > of all of the package names that I wanted it to emerge?
>> >
>> > I'm really sorry if this might  be a stupid question. I'd
>> > appreciate any guidance in the matter.
>> >
>> > Cheers!
>> >  
>> 
>> 
>> There is a file that contains all the packages you have installed.  It
>> is located here:
>> 
>> /var/lib/portage/world
>> 
>> One could copy that file to another system and do a emerge @world to
>> install the same list of packages.  Depending on what all you have
>> installed, it could confuse emerge and not be doable.  In the past, I
>> had a copy of the file and I emerged them a few at a time.  It's worth
>> trying by just coping the file tho.  It just might work. 
>
> It is safer to copy the world file to /etc/portage/sets/¹ and then
> emerge the set. This way portage won't think that the packages are
> already installed. So you could copy it to
> /etc/portage/sets/minimal-install and install it with emerge -a
> @minimal-install.
>
> Kind regards, tastytea
>
> ¹ 
>

That's clever. I'll read up on that, thanks!

-- 
   .  *+   
  +   Ang kalayaan ay dili gihatag, ini'y giabot.   
   *   + {gopher,gemini}://kalayaan.xyz*   
   .  C4AE 5D53 46A0 01DF 6E92  CB46 92D7 9FBB AB9F 3E37 .


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Re: [gentoo-user] Reproducible Installation Lists?

[Ramces Tampo-og Red]

Dale  writes:
> Ramces Tampo-og Red wrote:
>> Hello list,
>>
>> I'm a sort-of  newbie gentoo user and  I just wanted to ask  if what I'm
>> thinking is possible or if I'm just  being stupid. But either way, I was
>> wondering if it  is possible to export a list  of all installed software
>> in emerge and use that to recreate on another gentoo install.
>>
>> I have  a bunch of PCs  that are all  similarly specced and I  wanted to
>> create a minimal install "template" for all of them. If not, would it be
>> possible to pipe-in to emerge from stdin an output of all of the package
>> names that I wanted it to emerge?
>>
>> I'm really sorry if this might  be a stupid question. I'd appreciate any
>> guidance in the matter.
>>
>> Cheers!
>>
>
> There is a file that contains all the packages you have installed.  It
> is located here:
>
> /var/lib/portage/world
>
> One could copy that file to another system and do a emerge @world to
> install the same list of packages.  Depending on what all you have
> installed, it could confuse emerge and not be doable.  In the past, I
> had a copy of the file and I emerged them a few at a time.  It's worth
> trying by just coping the file tho.  It just might work. 
>

Thanks, I will look into that.

> Since you mention being new to Gentoo, don't forget the --oneshot or -1
> option when emerging things that should not be in the world file. 
> Libraries are one thing that should rarely if ever be in that file. 
> Once you get your install done and rarely install new packages, you can
> add that to the defaults in make.conf.  When I first started using
> Gentoo, I was bad to forget the -1 option and my world file was a mess. 
> It can lead to all sorts of problems later on.  The only entries in the
> world file should be packages you install and use directly.  It's rare
> that anything else should be there. 
>

Wait. Does this mean doing an emerge --ask foo-libs/lib or do you mean
the stuff that were pulled alongside packages? Since I do think that the
packages that I've installed certainly pulled libraries too.

> Happy Gentooing. 
>
> Dale
>
> :-)  :-) 
>

Cheers, you too!

-- 
   .  *+   
  +   Ang kalayaan ay dili gihatag, ini'y giabot.   
   *   + {gopher,gemini}://kalayaan.xyz*   
   .  C4AE 5D53 46A0 01DF 6E92  CB46 92D7 9FBB AB9F 3E37 .

Re: [gentoo-user] Reproducible Installation Lists?

[Michael]

On Saturday, 26 February 2022 12:07:40 GMT Ramces Tampo-og Red wrote:
> spareproject776  writes:
> > On Sat, Feb 26, 2022 at 06:47:12PM +0800, Ramces Tampo-og Red wrote:
> >> Hello list,
> >> 
> >> I'm a sort-of  newbie gentoo user and  I just wanted to ask  if what I'm
> >> thinking is possible or if I'm just  being stupid. But either way, I was
> >> wondering if it  is possible to export a list  of all installed software
> >> in emerge and use that to recreate on another gentoo install.
> >> 
> >> I have  a bunch of PCs  that are all  similarly specced and I  wanted to
> >> create a minimal install "template" for all of them. If not, would it be
> >> possible to pipe-in to emerge from stdin an output of all of the package
> >> names that I wanted it to emerge?
> >> 
> >> I'm really sorry if this might  be a stupid question. I'd appreciate any
> >> guidance in the matter.
> >> 
> >> Cheers!
> > 
> > emerge -avbk $(tr '\n' ' ' < /var/lib/portage/world)
> > 
> > If your doing more than one box binhost / binpkg has a far higher return
> > for alot more effort upfront provided you can live with -mtune=generic.
> 
> Thanks! I will check this out.

This is the page which explains how to build binary packages on one host and 
then install them on other PCs, without having to re-complile/rebuild them 
from source:

https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Binary_package_guide

It saves a lot of time, especially if you want to update slower machines.

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Reproducible Installation Lists?

[Ramces Tampo-og Red]

spareproject776  writes:
> On Sat, Feb 26, 2022 at 06:47:12PM +0800, Ramces Tampo-og Red wrote:
>> 
>> Hello list,
>> 
>> I'm a sort-of  newbie gentoo user and  I just wanted to ask  if what I'm
>> thinking is possible or if I'm just  being stupid. But either way, I was
>> wondering if it  is possible to export a list  of all installed software
>> in emerge and use that to recreate on another gentoo install.
>> 
>> I have  a bunch of PCs  that are all  similarly specced and I  wanted to
>> create a minimal install "template" for all of them. If not, would it be
>> possible to pipe-in to emerge from stdin an output of all of the package
>> names that I wanted it to emerge?
>> 
>> I'm really sorry if this might  be a stupid question. I'd appreciate any
>> guidance in the matter.
>> 
>> Cheers!
>
> emerge -avbk $(tr '\n' ' ' < /var/lib/portage/world)
>
> If your doing more than one box binhost / binpkg has a far higher return
> for alot more effort upfront provided you can live with -mtune=generic.
>
>

Thanks! I will check this out.

-- 
   .  *+   
  +   Ang kalayaan ay dili gihatag, ini'y giabot.   
   *   + {gopher,gemini}://kalayaan.xyz*   
   .  C4AE 5D53 46A0 01DF 6E92  CB46 92D7 9FBB AB9F 3E37 .


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

[gentoo-user] Scanner no longer detected with media-gfx/sane-backends-1.1.1-r2

[Michael]

I'm trying to find out why a very old and basic CanonScan N650U flatbed usb 
scanner stopped working after a recent an update to sane-backends-1.1.1-r2:

 Installed versions:  1.1.1-r2(09:12:17 24/02/22)(ipv6 usb zeroconf -
gphoto2 -snmp -systemd -threads -v4l -xinetd ABI_MIPS="-n32 -n64 -o32" 
ABI_S390="-32 -64" ABI_X86="64 -32 -x32" SANE_BACKENDS="canon canon630u 
genesys plustek -abaton -agfafocus -apple -artec -artec_eplus48u -as6e -
avision -bh -canon_dr -canon_lide70 -canon_pp -cardscan -coolscan -coolscan2 -
coolscan3 -dc25 -dc210 -dc240 -dell1600n_net -dmc -epjitsu -epson -epson2 -
escl -fujitsu -gt68xx -hp -hp3500 -hp3900 -hp4200 -hp5400 -hp5590 -hpljm1005 -
hpsj5s -hs2p -ibm -kodak -kodakaio -kvs20xx -kvs40xx -kvs1025 -leo -lexmark -
ma1509 -magicolor -matsushita -microtek -microtek2 -mustek -mustek_pp -
mustek_usb -mustek_usb2 -nec -net -niash -p5 -pie -pieusb -pixma -plustek_pp -
pnm -qcam -ricoh -ricoh2 -rts8891 -s9036 -sceptre -sharp -sm3600 -sm3840 -
snapscan -sp15c -st400 -stv680 -tamarack -teco1 -teco2 -teco3 -test -u12 -umax 
-umax1220u -umax_pp -xerox_mfp")

This scanner was able to be detected by the same user for many years now, 
without a problem.  The user is a member of groups 'scanner' and 'plugdev', 
but was NOT a member of group 'usb'.  While troubleshooting I added the user 
to the 'usb' group, which allowed the scanner to be detected again, but I do 
not understand why this sudden change in group ownership is now required.  Any 
ideas?

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

Re: [gentoo-user] Reproducible Installation Lists?

[tastytea]

On 2022-02-26 05:07-0600 Dale  wrote:

> Ramces Tampo-og Red wrote:
> > Hello list,
> >
> > I'm a sort-of  newbie gentoo user and  I just wanted to ask  if
> > what I'm thinking is possible or if I'm just  being stupid. But
> > either way, I was wondering if it  is possible to export a list  of
> > all installed software in emerge and use that to recreate on
> > another gentoo install.
> >
> > I have  a bunch of PCs  that are all  similarly specced and I
> > wanted to create a minimal install "template" for all of them. If
> > not, would it be possible to pipe-in to emerge from stdin an output
> > of all of the package names that I wanted it to emerge?
> >
> > I'm really sorry if this might  be a stupid question. I'd
> > appreciate any guidance in the matter.
> >
> > Cheers!
> >  
> 
> 
> There is a file that contains all the packages you have installed.  It
> is located here:
> 
> /var/lib/portage/world
> 
> One could copy that file to another system and do a emerge @world to
> install the same list of packages.  Depending on what all you have
> installed, it could confuse emerge and not be doable.  In the past, I
> had a copy of the file and I emerged them a few at a time.  It's worth
> trying by just coping the file tho.  It just might work. 

It is safer to copy the world file to /etc/portage/sets/¹ and then
emerge the set. This way portage won't think that the packages are
already installed. So you could copy it to
/etc/portage/sets/minimal-install and install it with emerge -a
@minimal-install.

Kind regards, tastytea

¹ 

Re: [gentoo-user] Reproducible Installation Lists?

[Dale]

Ramces Tampo-og Red wrote:
> Hello list,
>
> I'm a sort-of  newbie gentoo user and  I just wanted to ask  if what I'm
> thinking is possible or if I'm just  being stupid. But either way, I was
> wondering if it  is possible to export a list  of all installed software
> in emerge and use that to recreate on another gentoo install.
>
> I have  a bunch of PCs  that are all  similarly specced and I  wanted to
> create a minimal install "template" for all of them. If not, would it be
> possible to pipe-in to emerge from stdin an output of all of the package
> names that I wanted it to emerge?
>
> I'm really sorry if this might  be a stupid question. I'd appreciate any
> guidance in the matter.
>
> Cheers!
>


There is a file that contains all the packages you have installed.  It
is located here:

/var/lib/portage/world

One could copy that file to another system and do a emerge @world to
install the same list of packages.  Depending on what all you have
installed, it could confuse emerge and not be doable.  In the past, I
had a copy of the file and I emerged them a few at a time.  It's worth
trying by just coping the file tho.  It just might work. 

Since you mention being new to Gentoo, don't forget the --oneshot or -1
option when emerging things that should not be in the world file. 
Libraries are one thing that should rarely if ever be in that file. 
Once you get your install done and rarely install new packages, you can
add that to the defaults in make.conf.  When I first started using
Gentoo, I was bad to forget the -1 option and my world file was a mess. 
It can lead to all sorts of problems later on.  The only entries in the
world file should be packages you install and use directly.  It's rare
that anything else should be there. 

Happy Gentooing. 

Dale

:-)  :-) 

Re: [gentoo-user] Reproducible Installation Lists?

[spareproject776]

emerge -avbk $(tr '\n' ' ' < /var/lib/portage/world)

If your doing more than one box binhost / binpkg has a far higher return
for alot more effort upfront provided you can live with -mtune=generic.

On Sat, Feb 26, 2022 at 06:47:12PM +0800, Ramces Tampo-og Red wrote:
> 
> Hello list,
> 
> I'm a sort-of  newbie gentoo user and  I just wanted to ask  if what I'm
> thinking is possible or if I'm just  being stupid. But either way, I was
> wondering if it  is possible to export a list  of all installed software
> in emerge and use that to recreate on another gentoo install.
> 
> I have  a bunch of PCs  that are all  similarly specced and I  wanted to
> create a minimal install "template" for all of them. If not, would it be
> possible to pipe-in to emerge from stdin an output of all of the package
> names that I wanted it to emerge?
> 
> I'm really sorry if this might  be a stupid question. I'd appreciate any
> guidance in the matter.
> 
> Cheers!
> 
> -- 
>.  *+   
>   +   Ang kalayaan ay dili gihatag, ini'y giabot.   
>*   + {gopher,gemini}://kalayaan.xyz*   
>.  C4AE 5D53 46A0 01DF 6E92  CB46 92D7 9FBB AB9F 3E37 .



-- 

[gentoo-user] Reproducible Installation Lists?

[Ramces Tampo-og Red]

Hello list,

I'm a sort-of  newbie gentoo user and  I just wanted to ask  if what I'm
thinking is possible or if I'm just  being stupid. But either way, I was
wondering if it  is possible to export a list  of all installed software
in emerge and use that to recreate on another gentoo install.

I have  a bunch of PCs  that are all  similarly specced and I  wanted to
create a minimal install "template" for all of them. If not, would it be
possible to pipe-in to emerge from stdin an output of all of the package
names that I wanted it to emerge?

I'm really sorry if this might  be a stupid question. I'd appreciate any
guidance in the matter.

Cheers!

-- 
   .  *+   
  +   Ang kalayaan ay dili gihatag, ini'y giabot.   
   *   + {gopher,gemini}://kalayaan.xyz*   
   .  C4AE 5D53 46A0 01DF 6E92  CB46 92D7 9FBB AB9F 3E37 .


signature.asc
Description: PGP signature