On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 11:27 PM, Ben de Groot wrote:
> On 21 January 2013 12:16, Peter Stuge wrote:
> > Panagiotis Christopoulos wrote:
> >> I don't build server machines every day, others do and it would be
> >> much appreciated if they could respond here.
> >
> > I build catalyst stage4s. Any
On Mon, 21 Jan 2013 13:27:18 +0800
Ben de Groot wrote:
> On 21 January 2013 12:16, Peter Stuge wrote:
> > Panagiotis Christopoulos wrote:
> >> I don't build server machines every day, others do and it would be
> >> much appreciated if they could respond here.
> >
> > I build catalyst stage4s. An
On 21 January 2013 12:16, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Panagiotis Christopoulos wrote:
>> I don't build server machines every day, others do and it would be
>> much appreciated if they could respond here.
>
> I build catalyst stage4s. Any default profiles are kindof pointless
> for me; I have USE=-* and t
Panagiotis Christopoulos wrote:
> I don't build server machines every day, others do and it would be
> much appreciated if they could respond here.
I build catalyst stage4s. Any default profiles are kindof pointless
for me; I have USE=-* and the flags that I want.
Anything else seems a bit too r
On 23:47 Sat 19 Jan , Walter Dnes wrote:
> ...
> On a lark, I once tried the "default/linux/x86/10.0" profile for a
> re-install on my netbook without "-*". I soon ended up with more "-"
> entries in make.conf and package.use, than I have add-on entries when
> using "-*". And I was only ha
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 07:09:29AM -0500, Michael Mol wrote
> On Jan 17, 2013 3:35 AM, "Dirkjan Ochtman" wrote:
> >
> > On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 3:23 AM, Walter Dnes
> wrote:
> > > If someone wants a *REALLY* basic system, they can start off with
> > > USE="-*" and add on stuff as necessary when
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 19/01/13 05:47 AM, Ben de Groot wrote:
> Actually, that is what I would expect from the more "basic"
> oriented ones like Arch and Debian. Printer support should be an
> optional add-on, not part of the basic install. Maybe I'm too
> idealistic...
On 19 January 2013 18:26, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 3:26 AM, Ben de Groot wrote:
>>
>> People who do have printers can always enable it themselves. I don't
>> see any reason for cups to be enabled by default, especially not on a
>> minimal profile, and that includes the simple
On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 3:26 AM, Ben de Groot wrote:
>
> People who do have printers can always enable it themselves. I don't
> see any reason for cups to be enabled by default, especially not on a
> minimal profile, and that includes the simple desktop profile. The kde
> and gnome profiles are ex
On 19 January 2013 08:01, Christopher Head wrote:
> I understand that enabling flags only affects packages if they’re
> installed. I’m just saying that, in my opinion, sane-but-minimal should
> have CUPS disabled because there are plenty of computers that would
> want LibreOffice and/or Chromium i
On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 15:02:48 -0500
Rich Freeman wrote:
> We might be talking past each other. Sane but minimal is the target.
>
> Bottom line is that the question isn't whether a minimal system should
> have CUPS installed (that would be an argument for putting it in
> @system - ugh!). The que
On Wed, 16 Jan 2013 00:36:18 +0100
"Andreas K. Huettel" wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> several people have pointed out to me that the 10.0 -> 13.0 transition would
> be a good moment to finally remove the (also in my opinion rather useless)
> server profiles.
>
> The easiest way to do this would be to
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
On 01/17/2013 08:02 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 2:56 PM, Christopher Head
> wrote:
>> On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 14:32:01 -0500 Rich Freeman
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Sure, I can think of reasons why I would want chromium with
>>> -cups, but
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 2:56 PM, Christopher Head wrote:
> On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 14:32:01 -0500
> Rich Freeman wrote:
>
>> Sure, I can think of reasons why I would want chromium with -cups, but
>> the whole point is to target the TYPICAL user. And the context here
>> is servers - how many servers
On Thu, 17 Jan 2013 14:32:01 -0500
Rich Freeman wrote:
> Sure, I can think of reasons why I would want chromium with -cups, but
> the whole point is to target the TYPICAL user. And the context here
> is servers - how many servers would have chromium installed with
> -cups? If anything I'd expec
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 2:27 PM, Christopher Head wrote:
> On Wed, 16 Jan 2013 22:17:26 -0500
> Rich Freeman wrote:
>
>> Oh, and keep in mind that flags really only have an effect if the
>> corresponding packages are actually installed. For example, the cups
>> flag doesn't really have an effect
On Wed, 16 Jan 2013 22:17:26 -0500
Rich Freeman wrote:
> Oh, and keep in mind that flags really only have an effect if the
> corresponding packages are actually installed. For example, the cups
> flag doesn't really have an effect unless you install apps that do
> printing, so it seems pretty sa
On 01/17/2013 12:32 AM, Dustin C. Hatch wrote:
> On 1/16/2013 11:32, Alexis Ballier wrote:
>> Other option: kill the server subprofiles, keep profiles/target/server
>> and let people finally set /etc/make.profile as a dir and play with
>> multiple inheritance. We don't need dozens of subprofiles wi
On Jan 17, 2013 3:35 AM, "Dirkjan Ochtman" wrote:
>
> On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 3:23 AM, Walter Dnes
wrote:
> > If someone wants a *REALLY* basic system, they can start off with
> > USE="-*" and add on stuff as necessary when portage complains and/or
> > ebuilds break. That's what I'd recommend
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 12:59 AM, Andreas K. Huettel
wrote:
> my 2ct:
> * dri and cups should probably be moved to desktop profile
> * pppd is a local useflag and should be enabled by default in the capi ebuild
Definitely agree. Can we make these changes?
Cheers,
Dirkjan
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 3:23 AM, Walter Dnes wrote:
> If someone wants a *REALLY* basic system, they can start off with
> USE="-*" and add on stuff as necessary when portage complains and/or
> ebuilds break. That's what I'd recommend to someone wanting to set up a
> "basic server" machine.
Yea
On 1/16/2013 11:32, Alexis Ballier wrote:
Other option: kill the server subprofiles, keep profiles/target/server
and let people finally set /etc/make.profile as a dir and play with
multiple inheritance. We don't need dozens of subprofiles with only
eapi and parent files in them...
A.
I would lo
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 5:53 PM, Panagiotis Christopoulos
wrote:
> Err, ok, so now guys, we 're offering a base profile* with dri, cups, gmp,
> fortran and pppd(?) enabled, at the same time openmp enabled but threads
> disabled, no sockets, no caps no apache2 or mysql that I would probably
> want
On Thu, Jan 17, 2013 at 12:59:11AM +0100, Andreas K. Huettel wrote
> Sure a server is something generic, too. However, since you mentioned
> mysql above, how about a postgres server? Or a web server using a
> daemon different from apache? :)
>
> This is why I think (as others) a server profile
I think we agree that the last state of the server profiles was not useful. So
let's discuss what would be useful. For the medium-term future, not for this
current step now.
>
> Err, ok, so now guys, we 're offering a base profile* with dri, cups, gmp,
> fortran and pppd(?) enabled, at the sam
On 22:14 Wed 16 Jan , Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> Am Mittwoch, 16. Januar 2013, 00:36:18 schrieb Andreas K. Huettel:
> OK, I consider this consensus enough.
>
> ...
>
> Being the one that does the work, the server profiles are disappearing in
> 13.0.
>
Err, ok, so now guys, we 're offerin
Am Mittwoch, 16. Januar 2013, 00:36:18 schrieb Andreas K. Huettel:
> Hi,
>
> several people have pointed out to me that the 10.0 -> 13.0 transition
> would be a good moment to finally remove the (also in my opinion rather
> useless) server profiles.
>
OK, I consider this consensus enough.
[One
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 3:01 PM, Mike Gilbert wrote:
> As has been pointed out previously, the "base" profile does not set
> USE="perl python", so negating those flags in the server profile does
> basically nothing. If certain packages have IUSE="+perl +python" it
> might make a difference, but I
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/16/2013 08:12 AM, Michael Mol wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 8:32 AM, Panagiotis Christopoulos
> wrote:
>> On 00:36 Wed 16 Jan , Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
>>> several people have pointed out to me that the 10.0 -> 13.0
>>> transition woul
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 2:18 PM, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 8:16 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
>> 2 - the only difference between server profiles and the base profile
>> is USE="+snmp" and maybe one other flag
>
> USE="-perl -python snmp truetype xml"
>
As has been pointed out
On 01/16/2013 01:18 PM, Doug Goldstein wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 8:16 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> On 16/01/13 08:32 AM, Panagiotis Christopoulos wrote:
On 00:36 Wed 16 Jan , Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> several people have pointed out to me that the 10.0 -> 13.0
> transiti
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 8:16 AM, Ian Stakenvicius wrote:
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA256
>
> On 16/01/13 08:32 AM, Panagiotis Christopoulos wrote:
>> On 00:36 Wed 16 Jan , Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
>>> several people have pointed out to me that the 10.0 -> 13.0
>>> transiti
On 16 January 2013 22:16, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
> We have a base profile, we have a desktop profile... wouldn't that make
> the base the minimal profile that would likely be fit for a server? If
> not, we really should move that way. Having a base, desktop, and server
> profile seems si
Other option: kill the server subprofiles, keep profiles/target/server
and let people finally set /etc/make.profile as a dir and play with
multiple inheritance. We don't need dozens of subprofiles with only
eapi and parent files in them...
A.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA256
On 16/01/13 08:32 AM, Panagiotis Christopoulos wrote:
> On 00:36 Wed 16 Jan , Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
>> several people have pointed out to me that the 10.0 -> 13.0
>> transition would be a good moment to finally remove the (also in
>> my opini
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 01/16/2013 08:32 AM, Panagiotis Christopoulos wrote:
> On 00:36 Wed 16 Jan , Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
>> several people have pointed out to me that the 10.0 -> 13.0 transition would
>> be a good moment to finally remove the (also in my opinion
On Wed, Jan 16, 2013 at 8:32 AM, Panagiotis Christopoulos
wrote:
> On 00:36 Wed 16 Jan , Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
>> several people have pointed out to me that the 10.0 -> 13.0 transition would
>> be a good moment to finally remove the (also in my opinion rather useless)
>> server profiles.
>
On 00:36 Wed 16 Jan , Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> several people have pointed out to me that the 10.0 -> 13.0 transition would
> be a good moment to finally remove the (also in my opinion rather useless)
> server profiles.
>
The server profiles are not useless, if we can maintain them, and
On 16 January 2013 04:20, Sergey Popov wrote:
> 16.01.2013 03:36, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> several people have pointed out to me that the 10.0 -> 13.0 transition would
>> be a good moment to finally remove the (also in my opinion rather useless)
>> server profiles.
>>
>> The easie
On 1/15/13 3:36 PM, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
> several people have pointed out to me that the 10.0 -> 13.0 transition would
> be a good moment to finally remove the (also in my opinion rather useless)
> server profiles.
>
> The easiest way to do this would be to
> * just not copy the server p
16.01.2013 03:36, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> several people have pointed out to me that the 10.0 -> 13.0 transition would
> be a good moment to finally remove the (also in my opinion rather useless)
> server profiles.
>
> The easiest way to do this would be to
> * just not copy t
On 16/01/13 01:36, Andreas K. Huettel wrote:
Hi,
several people have pointed out to me that the 10.0 -> 13.0 transition would
be a good moment to finally remove the (also in my opinion rather useless)
server profiles.
The easiest way to do this would be to
* just not copy the server profiles f
Hi,
several people have pointed out to me that the 10.0 -> 13.0 transition would
be a good moment to finally remove the (also in my opinion rather useless)
server profiles.
The easiest way to do this would be to
* just not copy the server profiles from 10.0 to 13.0 and
* have the deprecatio
43 matches
Mail list logo
