[gentoo-catalyst] unionfs masked by x86 keyword?

[gentoo-catalyst] unionfs masked by x86 keyword?

[Wolverine]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 328 bytes --]

I try to append unionfs package to livecd-stage1-minimal.spec ( from 2006.0)
, build for x86,  but got error that
it is masked by ~x86 keyword

I checked the unionfs ebuild files, the KEYWORD variable is ""~x86 ~amd64
~ppc", I append "sys-fs/unionfs ~x86"
to /etc/portage/packages.keywords, it doesn't work.

so, what can I do?

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 433 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-catalyst] unionfs masked by x86 keyword?

["Andreas Rückert"]

Hi!

--<snip>--
 
> I checked the unionfs ebuild files, the KEYWORD variable is ""~x86 ~amd64
> ~ppc", I append "sys-fs/unionfs ~x86"
> to /etc/portage/packages.keywords, it doesn't work.
> 
> so, what can I do?

packages <- ?
That should be package.keywords? (Without the 's').
Do you have to unmask it in package.unmask?

BTW: Is there a good Union-FS howto? Is it faster during the boot?

Ciao,
Andreas

-- 


Der GMX SmartSurfer hilft bis zu 70% Ihrer Onlinekosten zu sparen!
Ideal für Modem und ISDN: http://www.gmx.net/de/go/smartsurfer
-- 
gentoo-catalyst@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-catalyst] unionfs masked by x86 keyword?

[Luca Marturana]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 904 bytes --]

Il giorno gio, 20/07/2006 alle 10.22 +0800, Wolverine ha scritto:
> 
> I try to append unionfs package to livecd-stage1-minimal.spec ( from
> 2006.0) , build for x86,  but got error that 
> it is masked by ~x86 keyword
> 
> I checked the unionfs ebuild files, the KEYWORD variable is ""~x86
> ~amd64 ~ppc", I append "sys-fs/unionfs ~x86" 
> to /etc/portage/packages.keywords, it doesn't work.
> 
> so, what can I do?
> 

Did you define this variable on your spec?

# This is an optional directory containing portage configuration files.
It
# follows the same syntax as /etc/portage and should be consistent
across all
# targets to minimize problems.
# example:
# portage_confdir: /etc/portage
portage_confdir: /mnt/catalyst2/stuff/uclibc-live-etc-portage

-- 
Luca Marturana (Luca89) <lucamarturana@gmail.com>

Jabber: <luca89@unstable.nl>
MSN: <scherlockholmes@hotmail.com>

[-- Attachment #2: Questa è una parte del messaggio firmata digitalmente --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-catalyst] unionfs masked by x86 keyword?

[Alex]

Andreas Rückert wrote:
> Is it faster during the boot?

I think it is, because it need not to copy the read-write image contents 
to tmpfs. I have never tested it, but that would make sense ;)

Bye

-- 
gentoo-catalyst@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-catalyst] unionfs masked by x86 keyword?

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 505 bytes --]

On Thu, 2006-07-20 at 08:31 +0200, "Andreas Rückert" wrote:
> BTW: Is there a good Union-FS howto? Is it faster during the boot?

Adding the unionfs package to your CD won't make it work.  The genkernel
portion for unionfs is pretty much broken right now and we haven't had
time to fix it.  If anyone does take the time to fix it, patches are
always welcome (via a bug report).

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead
x86 Architecture Team
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-catalyst] unionfs masked by x86 keyword?

[Chris Gianelloni]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1131 bytes --]

On Thu, 2006-07-20 at 10:52 +0000, Alex wrote:
> Andreas Rückert wrote:
> > Is it faster during the boot?
> 
> I think it is, because it need not to copy the read-write image contents 
> to tmpfs. I have never tested it, but that would make sense ;)

Incorrect.

Adding the unionfs package to the CD does exactly nothing but add the
binaries and modules.  It makes it only usable after the machine has
booted.

There is support for unionfs in genkernel, which means within the
initramfs, but it is not functional right now and we simply don't have
the time to look at it, since it's never been an advertised feature.
Basically, if someone files a bug against it (without a patch) we mark
it as INVALID and ask for a patch.  We have contemplated many times
simply removing the code altogether, since it is known to be broken, but
we always hoped that we would scrape together some time to fix it.

Using the in-genkernel code, it does boot faster.  It also has a smaller
memory footprint.

-- 
Chris Gianelloni
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead
x86 Architecture Team
Games - Developer
Gentoo Linux

[-- Attachment #2: This is a digitally signed message part --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]