Re: [gentoo-user] Can't boot using UEFI
On Sun, Jun 14, 2015 at 8:40 AM, João Matos jaon...@gmail.com wrote: Hi list, I've bought me a ultrabook dell vostro 5470, and I'm trying to get gentoo running on it. I'm having a few problems, but I'd like to correct the boot one first. I'm installing it from ubuntu live cd, and the comand: efibootmgr --create --disk /dev/sda --part 7 --label Gentoo --loader \boot\efi\boot\bootx64.efi seems to work. It put a entry on bios - Gentoo - but when I select it, the windows start (second boot). The handbook is not that clear, so I'm not sure if I should call /dev/sda7 of --part 7. Other difference is I'm not using a separate /boot. Its everything at /, so I'm also not not sure if this path is ok. This seems to be the very simple, and I'd like to have it on my system. But I've also tried grub2, and got the following error: grub2-install: error: cannot find EFI directory. What should I do? Have you tried gummiboot? AFAIR, it's a simple matter of doing: gummiboot --path=/boot install /boot should be yout EFI System Partition (ESP). Regards. -- Canek Peláez Valdés Profesor de asignatura, Facultad de Ciencias Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México
Re: [gentoo-user] Can't boot using UEFI
2015-06-14 11:02 GMT-03:00 Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com : Am 14.06.2015 um 15:40 schrieb João Matos: Hi list, I've bought me a ultrabook dell vostro 5470, and I'm trying to get gentoo running on it. I'm having a few problems, but I'd like to correct the boot one first. I'm installing it from ubuntu live cd, and the comand: efibootmgr --create --disk /dev/sda --part 7 --label Gentoo --loader \boot\efi\boot\bootx64.efi seems to work. It put a entry on bios - Gentoo - but when I select it, the windows start (second boot). The handbook is not that clear, so I'm not sure if I should call /dev/sda7 of --part 7. Other difference is I'm not using a separate /boot. Its everything at /, so I'm also not not sure if this path is ok. This seems to be the very simple, and I'd like to have it on my system. But I've also tried grub2, and got the following error: grub2-install: error: cannot find EFI directory. What should I do? Thank you, -- João Neto Linux User #461527 http://br.linkedin.com/pub/jo%C3%A3o-de-matos/7/316/552 so you don't have an efi boot partition? That would be your answer. Volker, the efi is already working for Windows. I just want to create a new entry. Is it really necessary to create a new partition? -- João Neto Linux User #461527 http://br.linkedin.com/pub/jo%C3%A3o-de-matos/7/316/552
[gentoo-user] Can't boot using UEFI
Hi list, I've bought me a ultrabook dell vostro 5470, and I'm trying to get gentoo running on it. I'm having a few problems, but I'd like to correct the boot one first. I'm installing it from ubuntu live cd, and the comand: efibootmgr --create --disk /dev/sda --part 7 --label Gentoo --loader \boot\efi\boot\bootx64.efi seems to work. It put a entry on bios - Gentoo - but when I select it, the windows start (second boot). The handbook is not that clear, so I'm not sure if I should call /dev/sda7 of --part 7. Other difference is I'm not using a separate /boot. Its everything at /, so I'm also not not sure if this path is ok. This seems to be the very simple, and I'd like to have it on my system. But I've also tried grub2, and got the following error: grub2-install: error: cannot find EFI directory. What should I do? Thank you, -- João Neto Linux User #461527 http://br.linkedin.com/pub/jo%C3%A3o-de-matos/7/316/552
Re: [gentoo-user] Can't boot using UEFI
Am 14.06.2015 um 15:40 schrieb João Matos: Hi list, I've bought me a ultrabook dell vostro 5470, and I'm trying to get gentoo running on it. I'm having a few problems, but I'd like to correct the boot one first. I'm installing it from ubuntu live cd, and the comand: efibootmgr --create --disk /dev/sda --part 7 --label Gentoo --loader \boot\efi\boot\bootx64.efi seems to work. It put a entry on bios - Gentoo - but when I select it, the windows start (second boot). The handbook is not that clear, so I'm not sure if I should call /dev/sda7 of --part 7. Other difference is I'm not using a separate /boot. Its everything at /, so I'm also not not sure if this path is ok. This seems to be the very simple, and I'd like to have it on my system. But I've also tried grub2, and got the following error: grub2-install: error: cannot find EFI directory. What should I do? Thank you, -- João Neto Linux User #461527 http://br.linkedin.com/pub/jo%C3%A3o-de-matos/7/316/552 so you don't have an efi boot partition? That would be your answer.
Re: [gentoo-user] Can't boot using UEFI
On Sunday 14 Jun 2015 14:40:40 João Matos wrote: Hi list, I've bought me a ultrabook dell vostro 5470, and I'm trying to get gentoo running on it. I'm having a few problems, but I'd like to correct the boot one first. I'm installing it from ubuntu live cd, and the comand: efibootmgr --create --disk /dev/sda --part 7 --label Gentoo --loader \boot\efi\boot\bootx64.efi seems to work. It put a entry on bios - Gentoo - but when I select it, the windows start (second boot). I think you have confused the too partitions EFI and /boot. The handbook is not that clear, so I'm not sure if I should call /dev/sda7 of --part 7. Other difference is I'm not using a separate /boot. Its everything at /, so I'm also not not sure if this path is ok. Your EFI boot code will jump to the FAT32 EFI partition. In all likelihood this is /dev/sda1. Unless you have some boot manager in there to point to your Linux partition at /dev/sda7 you will only boot what the EFI partition bootx64.efi code offers. Presently the bootx64.efi in the EFI partition is the MSWindows boot code. Create a back up if you intend to mess about with this, or you will need to use a MSWindows CD to recreate it with. This seems to be the very simple, and I'd like to have it on my system. But I've also tried grub2, and got the following error: grub2-install: error: cannot find EFI directory. Clearly it can't find the appropriate EFI partition. Have you mounted it? -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Can't boot using UEFI
/ # gdisk -l /dev/sda GPT fdisk (gdisk) version 1.0.0 Partition table scan: MBR: protective BSD: not present APM: not present GPT: present Found valid GPT with protective MBR; using GPT. Disk /dev/sda: 976773168 sectors, 465.8 GiB Logical sector size: 512 bytes Disk identifier (GUID): 757FFCA9-0B35-4AC3-BA77-B935FBBC57C9 Partition table holds up to 128 entries First usable sector is 34, last usable sector is 976773134 Partitions will be aligned on 2048-sector boundaries Total free space is 4029 sectors (2.0 MiB) Number Start (sector)End (sector) Size Code Name 12048 1026047 500.0 MiB EF00 EFI system partition 2 1026048 1107967 40.0 MiB Basic data partition 3 1107968 1370111 128.0 MiB 0C01 Microsoft reserved ... 4 1370112 2906111 750.0 MiB 2700 Basic data partition 5 2906112 127477759 59.4 GiB0700 Basic data partition 6 961155072 976771119 7.4 GiB 2700 Microsoft recovery ... 7 127477760 227518463 47.7 GiB8300 8 227518464 247998463 9.8 GiB 8300 9 247998464 961155071 340.1 GiB 0700 2015-06-14 11:25 GMT-03:00 Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com: On Sunday 14 Jun 2015 15:09:33 João Matos wrote: 2015-06-14 11:02 GMT-03:00 Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com Am 14.06.2015 um 15:40 schrieb João Matos: Hi list, I've bought me a ultrabook dell vostro 5470, and I'm trying to get gentoo running on it. I'm having a few problems, but I'd like to correct the boot one first. I'm installing it from ubuntu live cd, and the comand: efibootmgr --create --disk /dev/sda --part 7 --label Gentoo --loader \boot\efi\boot\bootx64.efi seems to work. It put a entry on bios - Gentoo - but when I select it, the windows start (second boot). The handbook is not that clear, so I'm not sure if I should call /dev/sda7 of --part 7. Other difference is I'm not using a separate /boot. Its everything at /, so I'm also not not sure if this path is ok. This seems to be the very simple, and I'd like to have it on my system. But I've also tried grub2, and got the following error: grub2-install: error: cannot find EFI directory. What should I do? Thank you, -- João Neto Linux User #461527 http://br.linkedin.com/pub/jo%C3%A3o-de-matos/7/316/552 so you don't have an efi boot partition? That would be your answer. Volker, the efi is already working for Windows. I just want to create a new entry. Is it really necessary to create a new partition? Can you please tell us what this shows: gdisk -l /dev/sda or fdisk -l assuming that /dev/sda is your drive. If you are multibooting then gummiboot would be advisable, but GRUB will work too. -- Regards, Mick -- João Neto Linux User #461527 http://br.linkedin.com/pub/jo%C3%A3o-de-matos/7/316/552
Re: [gentoo-user] Can't boot using UEFI
On Sunday 14 Jun 2015 15:09:33 João Matos wrote: 2015-06-14 11:02 GMT-03:00 Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com Am 14.06.2015 um 15:40 schrieb João Matos: Hi list, I've bought me a ultrabook dell vostro 5470, and I'm trying to get gentoo running on it. I'm having a few problems, but I'd like to correct the boot one first. I'm installing it from ubuntu live cd, and the comand: efibootmgr --create --disk /dev/sda --part 7 --label Gentoo --loader \boot\efi\boot\bootx64.efi seems to work. It put a entry on bios - Gentoo - but when I select it, the windows start (second boot). The handbook is not that clear, so I'm not sure if I should call /dev/sda7 of --part 7. Other difference is I'm not using a separate /boot. Its everything at /, so I'm also not not sure if this path is ok. This seems to be the very simple, and I'd like to have it on my system. But I've also tried grub2, and got the following error: grub2-install: error: cannot find EFI directory. What should I do? Thank you, -- João Neto Linux User #461527 http://br.linkedin.com/pub/jo%C3%A3o-de-matos/7/316/552 so you don't have an efi boot partition? That would be your answer. Volker, the efi is already working for Windows. I just want to create a new entry. Is it really necessary to create a new partition? Can you please tell us what this shows: gdisk -l /dev/sda or fdisk -l assuming that /dev/sda is your drive. If you are multibooting then gummiboot would be advisable, but GRUB will work too. -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Backgammon (GNU) anybody
On 06/13/2015 05:42:10 PM, Stroller wrote: On Fri, 12 June 2015, at 5:03 pm, Helmut Jarausch jarau...@skynet.be wrote: On 06/11/2015 09:32:23 PM, Grant Edwards wrote: I got curious and just did emerge -av gnubg. It compiled and installed fine, and it seems to work. Many thanks, it turnt out to be a strange problem. When compiled with gcc-5.1.0 and -O2, gnubg goes into a tight loop within memset even before function main is entered. When compiled with gcc-5.1.0 and -O1, gnubg gets a segment fault from within memset even before function main is entered. When compiled with gcc-5.1.0 and -O0, it works just fine. Stepping back to gcc-4.9.2 it succeeds even when compiled with -O2. So, it looks like a compiler error of gcc-5.1.0 You should report this upstream. To gcc, I think? As I found out, it has been fixed already. Not for gcc-5.1 but with a recent snapshot of gcc-5 as well as gcc-6.
Re: [gentoo-user] Can't boot using UEFI
On Sunday 14 Jun 2015 15:30:18 João Matos wrote: / # gdisk -l /dev/sda [snip ...] Number Start (sector)End (sector) Size Code Name 12048 1026047 500.0 MiB EF00 EFI system partition OK, so this is your EFI partition, not /dev/sda7. Mount /dev/sda1 and create your Linux-bootx64.efi in here. Then set Gummiboot which will detect and list the different .efi boot files you have created. -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Can't boot using UEFI
Am 14.06.2015 um 16:30 schrieb João Matos: / # gdisk -l /dev/sda GPT fdisk (gdisk) version 1.0.0 Partition table scan: MBR: protective BSD: not present APM: not present GPT: present Found valid GPT with protective MBR; using GPT. Disk /dev/sda: 976773168 sectors, 465.8 GiB Logical sector size: 512 bytes Disk identifier (GUID): 757FFCA9-0B35-4AC3-BA77-B935FBBC57C9 Partition table holds up to 128 entries First usable sector is 34, last usable sector is 976773134 Partitions will be aligned on 2048-sector boundaries Total free space is 4029 sectors (2.0 MiB) Number Start (sector)End (sector) Size Code Name 12048 1026047 500.0 MiB EF00 EFI system partition 2 1026048 1107967 40.0 MiB Basic data partition 3 1107968 1370111 128.0 MiB 0C01 Microsoft reserved ... 4 1370112 2906111 750.0 MiB 2700 Basic data partition 5 2906112 127477759 59.4 GiB0700 Basic data partition 6 961155072 976771119 7.4 GiB 2700 Microsoft recovery ... 7 127477760 227518463 47.7 GiB8300 8 227518464 247998463 9.8 GiB 8300 9 247998464 961155071 340.1 GiB 0700 2015-06-14 11:25 GMT-03:00 Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com mailto:michaelkintz...@gmail.com: On Sunday 14 Jun 2015 15:09:33 João Matos wrote: 2015-06-14 11:02 GMT-03:00 Volker Armin Hemmann volkerar...@googlemail.com mailto:volkerar...@googlemail.com Am 14.06.2015 um 15:40 schrieb João Matos: Hi list, I've bought me a ultrabook dell vostro 5470, and I'm trying to get gentoo running on it. I'm having a few problems, but I'd like to correct the boot one first. I'm installing it from ubuntu live cd, and the comand: efibootmgr --create --disk /dev/sda --part 7 --label Gentoo --loader \boot\efi\boot\bootx64.efi seems to work. It put a entry on bios - Gentoo - but when I select it, the windows start (second boot). The handbook is not that clear, so I'm not sure if I should call /dev/sda7 of --part 7. Other difference is I'm not using a separate /boot. Its everything at /, so I'm also not not sure if this path is ok. This seems to be the very simple, and I'd like to have it on my system. But I've also tried grub2, and got the following error: grub2-install: error: cannot find EFI directory. What should I do? Thank you, -- João Neto Linux User #461527 http://br.linkedin.com/pub/jo%C3%A3o-de-matos/7/316/552 so you don't have an efi boot partition? That would be your answer. Volker, the efi is already working for Windows. I just want to create a new entry. Is it really necessary to create a new partition? Can you please tell us what this shows: gdisk -l /dev/sda or fdisk -l assuming that /dev/sda is your drive. If you are multibooting then gummiboot would be advisable, but GRUB will work too. -- Regards, Mick -- João Neto Linux User #461527 http://br.linkedin.com/pub/jo%C3%A3o-de-matos/7/316/552 you have to put your gentoo binary into that efi boot partition. And tell efibootmgr to look there
Re: [gentoo-user] Can't boot using UEFI
2015-06-14 12:17 GMT-03:00 Mick michaelkintz...@gmail.com: On Sunday 14 Jun 2015 15:30:18 João Matos wrote: / # gdisk -l /dev/sda [snip ...] Number Start (sector)End (sector) Size Code Name 12048 1026047 500.0 MiB EF00 EFI system partition OK, so this is your EFI partition, not /dev/sda7. Mount /dev/sda1 and create your Linux-bootx64.efi in here. Then set Gummiboot which will detect and list the different .efi boot files you have created. -- Regards, Mick I've Just installed grub2. It's ok for now. Gentoo is working and windows isn't. I'll back to bootloader another time. Thank you all for your tips :) -- João Neto Linux User #461527 http://br.linkedin.com/pub/jo%C3%A3o-de-matos/7/316/552
Re: [gentoo-user] Can't boot using UEFI
On Sunday 14 Jun 2015 16:22:07 João Matos wrote: I've Just installed grub2. It's ok for now. Gentoo is working and windows isn't. I'll back to bootloader another time. Thank you all for your tips :) GRUB should scan the /boot partition for any OS bootloaders and find MSWindows. Have you run update-grub? -- Regards, Mick signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
Re: [gentoo-user] Can't boot using UEFI
On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 17:35:48 +0100, Mick wrote: I've Just installed grub2. It's ok for now. Gentoo is working and windows isn't. I'll back to bootloader another time. Thank you all for your tips :) GRUB should scan the /boot partition for any OS bootloaders and find MSWindows. Have you run update-grub? But the ESP is not mounted at /boot. To keep things simple with UEFI, I prefer to use the ESP as /boot - if you use Gummibioot this is compulsory. -- Neil Bothwick Ralph's Observation - It is a mistake to allow any mechanical object to realize that you are in a hurry. pgpwJRW6BSV1n.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[gentoo-user] Re: Profile listings
Andreas K. Huettel dilfridge at gentoo.org writes:
You're venturing into wonderland. Expect some mad hatters to pop up.
Yes!
So my questions related to how does gentoo actually determines the exact
list of programs that are minimally installed, with the specific
arch and the profile selected? In previous times, I just put USE='-*' in
the make.conf file and built upwards from there.
Don't, it breaks things.
It use to work. So maybe building up from an embedded profile for a given
arch? Problem is I'm not certain there is an embedded profile
for any of the arches? If there is, then I could use that list of
packages and tweak the list for another arch.
Still there were baseline
packages in the most minimal of stage based gentoo builds. I'm looking for
a current approach to bridging between a baseline default profile (for
amd64 that would be: [1] default/linux/amd64/13.0 *) and an embedded
amd64 profile (if one currently exist? How do I find the potential
profiles for say another arch (ppc for example), from an amd64 based
gentoo system? Tools? Recommended scripts to review?
Your best bet is the (undocumented) portage python API. I guess the
question is specific enough that you can pop into #gentoo-portage and
ask.
OK. Good info. adhoc, as I suspected, burried in codes, scrips
and data structures. Busybox was the only common package
I could find for embedded trees.
The choices from eselect come from /usr/portage/profiles/profiles.desc
Ah!
About what each of these profiles does - you can find that out by
starting with the directory given in profiles.desc (e.g.,
/usr/portage/profiles/hardened/linux/amd64 for choice [14]) and follow
the content of the parent files in the directories for inheritance.
Ahhh! Boy some organizing tool would be keen to discern the differences.
The next part would be the buzilla status of the profiles in comparison
to what is common. Remember, I'm looking bottom (minimalistic upwards)
to it should be much less that the (77) baseline packages
There is a gap between embedded and baseline(=default); and no rhyme or
reason. Adhoc per arch, mostly, if at all.
The next thought is how then to best (succinctly) determine the complete
list of packages that will be pulled into any given (arch) profile.
Basically you have to follow the inheritance tree as defined by the
parent files, and add stuff up. For the detailed algorithms, see
app-doc/pms (good bedtime reading).
The targets (systemd, desktop, kde, gnome) are more or less maintained
by the respective teams.
The arch dirs are maintained by the arch teams.
Since changes to any of these dirs may affect a lot, they are usually
done with care and rather minimally.
Yep! I keep old boxes around for such (destructive risk) noodling.
Finally. What if I want to roll my own profiles; should I just
build on one of the minimal ones or create something anew that exists
only on my systems?
You *can* roll your own profiles, but it's non-trivial and can cause
pain. You'll probably end up asking a lot of questions before it works.
It took me a while to figure it out even when already knowing how the
main profile tree more or less works.
Surely I know this. But looking for some standardization for
embedded-Gentoo (i.e. the most mini-sizable possible embedded gentoo
linux) should
not be that difficult for most common arches we support. Getting from there
to minimized and then default from the same arch tree (pathways) should
be mostly the same except for things mandated by the functional differences
of the arches themselves. I think I'm going to limit this (for now) to these
arches (AMD64 x86_32 arm64 arm(32).
For an example, check my dev overlay (it adds one profile for x86 and for
amd64).
Will do.
Your safest bet would be to inherit the arch main profile (e.g.
default/linux/amd64/13.0) and maybe remove some stuff. However, there's
not too much to remove left there. So I'm not sure if it's really worth
the effort.
Cheers, Andreas
That is the 'top down' approach ((default -- embedded). You'd think this
quest is the same, but I'm going to first look at this 'bottom up' (embedded
-- minimal -- default); but much is missing. So I'll look at what exists
in various embedded arches. I just cannot reconcile why there is no bridge
between embedded and (some/any)minimal and default.
I do understand now why you cannot (usually) change profiles; the profile
system is a mess and really needs a whole new overall design. That's why we
still have '13' in the profiles even though it's 2015. The entire gentoo
profile system is showing it's age and evolutionary problems, imho. I not
saying I'm taking on that brood of hornets, but just a few select
migrations from embedded to minimal.
Note {embedded minimal default} I still have some vintage gentoo
systems running which have very few flags set and include
[gentoo-user] Profile listings
Hello Background: As a minimalist I'm trying to ferret out the differences in some of the more minimal profiles versus potential embedded profiles, across several different architectures: (arm32, arm64 x63_32 x86_64 ppc etc). I am also quite curious to find a tool that will clearly list the complete set of packages a given (eselected) profile will yield and the best ways to customize that list of minimal (critical) packages. So in /etc/portage/profiles, we have lots of good information. For example the 'base' dir currently lists 77 packages found in most profiles (?). The '/usr/portage/profiles/arch.list' dir lists not only the recognized arches but also Prefix Keywords. I'm not exactly sure how all of this profile stuff works; who decides what's (packages) in and out, package_masks etc etc. So my questions related to how does gentoo actually determines the exact list of programs that are minimally installed, with the specific arch and the profile selected? In previous times, I just put USE='-*' in the make.conf file and built upwards from there. Still there were baseline packages in the most minimal of stage based gentoo builds. I'm looking for a current approach to bridging between a baseline default profile (for amd64 that would be: [1] default/linux/amd64/13.0 *) and an embedded amd64 profile (if one currently exist? How do I find the potential profiles for say another arch (ppc for example), from an amd64 based gentoo system? Tools? Recommended scripts to review? 'eselect profile list' currently shows 21 amd64 choices: [1] default/linux/amd64/13.0 * [2] default/linux/amd64/13.0/selinux [3] default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop [4] default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop/gnome [5] default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop/gnome/systemd [6] default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop/kde [7] default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop/kde/systemd [8] default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop/plasma [9] default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop/plasma/systemd [10] default/linux/amd64/13.0/developer [11] default/linux/amd64/13.0/no-multilib [12] default/linux/amd64/13.0/systemd [13] default/linux/amd64/13.0/x32 [14] hardened/linux/amd64 [15] hardened/linux/amd64/selinux [16] hardened/linux/amd64/no-multilib [17] hardened/linux/amd64/no-multilib/selinux [18] hardened/linux/amd64/x32 [19] hardened/linux/musl/amd64 [20] default/linux/uclibc/amd64 [21] hardened/linux/uclibc/amd64 But looking here at the files and directories ( ls /usr/portage/profiles) I see an organization structure that differs from the profile listing semantics. So is there a script(s) that shows me what is being read from the directory tree that yields those 21 choices? It seems a bit convoluted to me, but I could easily have missed the documents that organize and discuss such details? Or at least a listing of the scripts that build these profile lists? Or is this adhoc? The next thought is how then to best (succinctly) determine the complete list of packages that will be pulled into any given (arch) profile. Is this a fiefdom situation where those devs that maintain that arch (tongue in cheek) quasi-use these scripts, config files and the /usr/portage/profiles tree structure, consistently or as they wish? I'm not looking for emotional responses, just clarity on where we are. Finally. What if I want to roll my own profiles; should I just build on one of the minimal ones or create something anew that exists only on my systems? If the latter, any insight or examples would be keen information. Yes, I know messing with the 'will of the dev(masters) will put me on a course of little help; but I just see a better way that I want to experiment with the profile pieces that are integral to my efforts. My main goal is to bridge the gap between what is embedded (truly minimalistic) and a minimized (via the profile) gentoo system. TIA, James
Re: [gentoo-user] Profile listings
On Sun, 14 Jun 2015 19:22:14 + (UTC) James wrote: Hello Background: As a minimalist I'm trying to ferret out the differences in some of the more minimal profiles versus potential embedded profiles, across several different architectures: (arm32, arm64 x63_32 x86_64 ppc etc). I am also quite curious to find a tool that will clearly list the complete set of packages a given (eselected) profile will yield and the best ways to customize that list of minimal (critical) packages. So in /etc/portage/profiles, we have lots of good information. For example the 'base' dir currently lists 77 packages found in most profiles (?). The '/usr/portage/profiles/arch.list' dir lists not only the recognized arches but also Prefix Keywords. I'm not exactly sure how all of this profile stuff works; who decides what's (packages) in and out, package_masks etc etc. So my questions related to how does gentoo actually determines the exact list of programs that are minimally installed, with the specific arch and the profile selected? In previous times, I just put USE='-*' in the make.conf file and built upwards from there. Profile do all the stuff that can be done or overridden in /etc/portage, but they define some sane default sets of settings for common profiles. USE=-* will override all USE settings in your profile. As you were already warned, this may break stuff: e.g. expected functionality will not be available or package will refuse to build if it needs at least one of USE flags set (e.g. alternative foo providers). So you must test things very carefully with USE=-*. A set of default packages is defined in the packages file of each profile. Profiles usually have parent file which lists parent profiles: they are inherited, but may be overridden here and there in a child profile. If you want an absolutely minimal system, after you have set it up you may remove some packages even from the @system set. E.g. if you're sure you don't need man or ssh, remove corresponding packages. Just be careful here since it is easy to brick your system here. Best regards, Andrew Savchenko pgpLBt6CBmQM3.pgp Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Profile listings
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA512
I do understand now why you cannot (usually) change profiles; the profile
system is a mess and really needs a whole new overall design. That's why we
still have '13' in the profiles even though it's 2015. The entire gentoo
profile system is showing it's age and evolutionary problems, imho. I not
saying I'm taking on that brood of hornets, but just a few select
migrations from embedded to minimal.
Yes it needs some bigger overhaul, there's more or less agreement on it.
Unfortunately that is also a big amount of work, and needs a lot of planning.
So it won't happen overnight...
That said... Changing profile on your local machine is not a big deal usually.
And there just has not been the need for a new profile tree in the meantime.
(BTW, before 13 was 10, but that didnt get its name from 2010...)
Note {embedded minimal default} I still have some vintage gentoo
systems running which have very few flags set and include (USE=-*) in
make.conf. And a {state-machine/executive/rtos embedded(linux)},
just so we are on the same page.
Would be interesting to know what you mean exactly by minimal (there is no
such profile) and embedded.
- --
Andreas K. Huettel
Gentoo Linux developer
dilfri...@gentoo.org
http://www.akhuettel.de/
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v2.0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=rfDJ
-END PGP SIGNATURE-
[gentoo-user] Re: Profile listings
Andreas K. Huettel dilfridge at gentoo.org writes:
Note {embedded minimal default} I still have some vintage gentoo
systems running which have very few flags set and include (USE=-*) in
make.conf. And a {state-machine/executive/rtos embedded(linux)},
just so we are on the same page.
Would be interesting to know what you mean exactly by minimal (there
is no such profile) and embedded.
Let me state this again, from the top down. Ok Say I install the default
profile, for say and arm64 system (a dev board with graphics chip like
96board. I can install gentoo on that with a minimum number of packages.
But let's say all I really want is IPtables (or nftables) and ssh.
Surely the default profile has more than is need. So if everything not
absolutely was stripped out, it'd be a minimized gentoo system (my
nomenclature). This would eventually include a very trimmed kernel,
and very few processes running. I use to build these (some years ago)
and it was easy, just put {USE=-*} in make.conf and add a very few flags.
X86 mostly.
Now say I go to the gentoo_embedded_handbook and build a minimum system
for an arm 7 chip. It is even small than this aforementioned minimal
gentoo system, as it is embedded (yocto) or OE would be straightforward now,
but Linaro is bloated for an embedded system).
SO we have this relationship:
embedded minimal default as far as I am concerned with profiles.
I undertand the history of gentoo, so I know, particularly below a default
profile, it's been adhoc. Maybe the minimal should use 'sys-apps/S6' just
for grins?
OK? I not saying this is the current way it is in gentoo, there is no
mapping between and embedded gentoo system and a default gentoo system;
so I am going to develop one, for my interests. Input from others is welcomed.
James
[gentoo-user] Re: Profile listings
Andrew Savchenko bircoph at gentoo.org writes: Profile do all the stuff that can be done or overridden in /etc/portage, but they define some sane default sets of settings for common profiles. USE=-* will override all USE settings in your profile. As you were already warned, this may break stuff: e.g. expected functionality will not be available or package will refuse to build if it needs at least one of USE flags set (e.g. alternative foo providers). So you must test things very carefully with USE=-*. yes, of coarse. A set of default packages is defined in the packages file of each profile. Profiles usually have parent file which lists parent profiles: they are inherited, but may be overridden here and there in a child profile. Yes. This is why I was looking for a 'tool' or script that would allow me to easily browse the default package listings for the different arch types with a default profile. In fact, I bet I can trim out even more packages, or figure what what I need to add back in after -* on a given chipset/arch_family. If you want an absolutely minimal system, after you have set it up you may remove some packages even from the at system set. E.g. if you're sure you don't need man or ssh, remove corresponding packages. Just be careful here since it is easy to brick your system here. Yes, I keep old boxes around just to burn a bit and re_install (x86 first). I bet you have done this before. recently on amd64 or arm64? Best regards, Andrew Savchenko TIA, James
Re: [gentoo-user] Profile listings
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA512 Hi James , As a minimalist I'm trying to ferret out the differences in some of the more minimal profiles versus potential embedded profiles, across several different architectures: (arm32, arm64 x63_32 x86_64 ppc etc). I am also quite curious to find a tool that will clearly list the complete set of packages a given (eselected) profile will yield and the best ways to customize that list of minimal (critical) packages. You're venturing into wonderland. Expect some mad hatters to pop up. So in /etc/portage/profiles, we have lots of good information. You probably mean /usr/portage/profiles? For example the 'base' dir currently lists 77 packages found in most profiles (?). The '/usr/portage/profiles/arch.list' dir lists not only the recognized arches but also Prefix Keywords. I'm not exactly sure how all of this profile stuff works; who decides what's (packages) in and out, package_masks etc etc. So my questions related to how does gentoo actually determines the exact list of programs that are minimally installed, with the specific arch and the profile selected? In previous times, I just put USE='-*' in the make.conf file and built upwards from there. Don't, it breaks things. Still there were baseline packages in the most minimal of stage based gentoo builds. I'm looking for a current approach to bridging between a baseline default profile (for amd64 that would be: [1] default/linux/amd64/13.0 *) and an embedded amd64 profile (if one currently exist? How do I find the potential profiles for say another arch (ppc for example), from an amd64 based gentoo system? Tools? Recommended scripts to review? Your best bet is the (undocumented) portage python API. I guess the question is specific enough that you can pop into #gentoo-portage and ask. 'eselect profile list' currently shows 21 amd64 choices: [1] default/linux/amd64/13.0 * [2] default/linux/amd64/13.0/selinux [3] default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop [4] default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop/gnome [5] default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop/gnome/systemd [6] default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop/kde [7] default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop/kde/systemd [8] default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop/plasma [9] default/linux/amd64/13.0/desktop/plasma/systemd [10] default/linux/amd64/13.0/developer [11] default/linux/amd64/13.0/no-multilib [12] default/linux/amd64/13.0/systemd [13] default/linux/amd64/13.0/x32 [14] hardened/linux/amd64 [15] hardened/linux/amd64/selinux [16] hardened/linux/amd64/no-multilib [17] hardened/linux/amd64/no-multilib/selinux [18] hardened/linux/amd64/x32 [19] hardened/linux/musl/amd64 [20] default/linux/uclibc/amd64 [21] hardened/linux/uclibc/amd64 But looking here at the files and directories ( ls /usr/portage/profiles) I see an organization structure that differs from the profile listing semantics. So is there a script(s) that shows me what is being read from the directory tree that yields those 21 choices? It seems a bit convoluted to me, but I could easily have missed the documents that organize and discuss such details? Or at least a listing of the scripts that build these profile lists? Or is this adhoc? The choices from eselect come from /usr/portage/profiles/profiles.desc About what each of these profiles does - you can find that out by starting with the directory given in profiles.desc (e.g., /usr/portage/profiles/hardened/linux/amd64 for choice [14]) and follow the content of the parent files in the directories for inheritance. The next thought is how then to best (succinctly) determine the complete list of packages that will be pulled into any given (arch) profile. Is this a fiefdom situation where those devs that maintain that arch (tongue in cheek) quasi-use these scripts, config files and the /usr/portage/profiles tree structure, consistently or as they wish? I'm not looking for emotional responses, just clarity on where we are. Basically you have to follow the inheritance tree as defined by the parent files, and add stuff up. For the detailed algorithms, see app-doc/pms (good bedtime reading). The targets (systemd, desktop, kde, gnome) are more or less maintained by the respective teams. The arch dirs are maintained by the arch teams. Since changes to any of these dirs may affect a lot, they are usually done with care and rather minimally. Finally. What if I want to roll my own profiles; should I just build on one of the minimal ones or create something anew that exists only on my systems? You *can* roll your own profiles, but it's non-trivial and can cause pain. You'll probably end up asking a lot of questions before it works. It took me a while to figure it out even when already knowing how the main profile tree more or less works. For an example, check my dev overlay (it adds one profile for x86 and for amd64).
