[gentoo-dev] baselayout-1.8.6.4

[gentoo-dev] baselayout-1.8.6.4

[Martin Schlemmer]

Hi

I just unmasked baselayout-1.8.6.4 and moved it to unstable.  It should
be stable, but upgrades could be bumpy.  PLEASE run etc-update after
install and update ALL config files.

New things for 1.8.6 release (just a quick list):

- Fully support Linux-2.5.xx kernels!

- Do not use tmpfs for caching anymore

- A nice looking /etc/issue, thanks to v|rus (bug #16806).

- Lots of fixes and improvements


If any issues, please let me know, or add a bug.


Regards,

-- 

Martin Schlemmer
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer
Cape Town, South Africa


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] baselayout-1.8.6.4

[Robin H. Johnson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1757 bytes --]

(forgot to include the list)

On Tue, Mar 18, 2003 at 10:28:09PM +0200, Martin Schlemmer wrote:
> Hi
> 
> I just unmasked baselayout-1.8.6.4 and moved it to unstable.  It should
> be stable, but upgrades could be bumpy.  PLEASE run etc-update after
> install and update ALL config files.
> 
> New things for 1.8.6 release (just a quick list):
> 
> - Fully support Linux-2.5.xx kernels!
> 
> - Do not use tmpfs for caching anymore
> 
> - A nice looking /etc/issue, thanks to v|rus (bug #16806).
> 
> - Lots of fixes and improvements
> 
> 
> If any issues, please let me know, or add a bug.
Just tried to merge it on a new gentoo box i'm setting up from 1.4_rc3,
I have buildpkg configured, and when it comes to merging in the binary
package, 
This happens:
>>> Merging sys-apps/baselayout-1.8.6.4 to /
 * Changing CONFIG_PROTECT_MASK to ensure critical files are updated ...

then it just sits there, I waited 10 minutes for it, then checked up via
ps and lsof, but it doesn't appear to be doing anything. 

On top it's idling only, not doing anything.

Digging further, it's running etc-update, and spinning away somewhere
inside that.

Line 472 of the ebuild is:
 etc-update &> /dev/null

so I'm thinking etc-update is looking for some input.

More details soon.

> -- 
> Martin Schlemmer
> Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer
> Cape Town, South Africa
What's the weather in the mother city doing today?
(I'm an south african now living in vancouver, canada)

-- 
Robin Hugh Johnson
E-Mail     : robbat2@orbis-terrarum.net
Home Page  : http://www.orbis-terrarum.net/?l=people.robbat2
ICQ#       : 30269588 or 41961639
GnuPG FP   : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED  F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 232 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] baselayout-1.8.6.4

[Robin H. Johnson]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1155 bytes --]

On Tue, Mar 18, 2003 at 01:19:22PM -0800, Robin H. Johnson wrote:
> Line 472 of the ebuild is:
>  etc-update &> /dev/null
> so I'm thinking etc-update is looking for some input.
> More details soon.
I changed the line to just be plain etc-update and it worked fine after
that, but again it didn't request any input, just run straight thru.

One question about the behavior tho. Say I have pending updates for
etc-update, and some of them I want to reject, but I haven't run
etc-update and put them in yet.

Then I upgrade baselayout, and it (at least looking at the code)
deprotected all the changes and forces ALL changes in without question.

Surely this is not a desirable effect?
It should either:
1. force in only it's own changes, and leave other stuff alone
2. behave like normal etc-update for everything
3. refuse to apply itself until the user has done etc-update

+1 for #3 here, +0.5 for #2

-- 
Robin Hugh Johnson
E-Mail     : robbat2@orbis-terrarum.net
Home Page  : http://www.orbis-terrarum.net/?l=people.robbat2
ICQ#       : 30269588 or 41961639
GnuPG FP   : 11AC BA4F 4778 E3F6 E4ED  F38E B27B 944E 3488 4E85

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 232 bytes --]

[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-core] baselayout-1.8.6.4

[Bart Lauwers]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

How about paralellized execution of services that do not cross depend (to 
decrease time to boot)? Anyway some good ideas are here: 
http://www.atnf.csiro.au/people/rgooch/linux/boot-scripts/

Best regards,
 Bart

On Tuesday 18 March 2003 21:28, Martin Schlemmer wrote:
> Hi
>
> I just unmasked baselayout-1.8.6.4 and moved it to unstable.  It should
> be stable, but upgrades could be bumpy.  PLEASE run etc-update after
> install and update ALL config files.
>
> New things for 1.8.6 release (just a quick list):
>
> - Fully support Linux-2.5.xx kernels!
>
> - Do not use tmpfs for caching anymore
>
> - A nice looking /etc/issue, thanks to v|rus (bug #16806).
>
> - Lots of fixes and improvements
>
>
> If any issues, please let me know, or add a bug.
>
>
> Regards,
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+enn7F7c0SsGMVKgRAm93AJ91cJzV4PjaPTH0n94fODAsOPF8OQCfbi9F
joFl7vU9f4cdwtX5RoT4dus=
=y3YI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-core] baselayout-1.8.6.4

[C. Brewer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2206 bytes --]

I apologize for the top-post, but its getting long. I second the motion for parallelized execution, but would like to go one better: named run-levels!
I spoke with seemant about this quite a few times, but it appears our volunteer was too busy:) I think this is worth a glance: www.winterdrache.de/linux/newboot

This does the parallels and I think that the need(8) function could reduce the stress of writing your own need scripts, which is the impression I got from checking out the current boot situation, and does one better than rgooch's scripts in that it does support the named runlevels also.(The link above actually used on the same page as the one Bart offered, but was removed in the last 6 months or so.)
Also I would like to note that while the ebuilds for baselayout are unstable,
versions 1.8.6.0-4 are still in package.mask, in case that was unattended.
TIA:)


On Fri, 21 Mar 2003 03:33:28 +0100
Bart Lauwers <blauwers@gentoo.org> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> How about paralellized execution of services that do not cross depend (to 
> decrease time to boot)? Anyway some good ideas are here: 
> http://www.atnf.csiro.au/people/rgooch/linux/boot-scripts/
> 
> Best regards,
>  Bart
> 
> On Tuesday 18 March 2003 21:28, Martin Schlemmer wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > I just unmasked baselayout-1.8.6.4 and moved it to unstable.  It should
> > be stable, but upgrades could be bumpy.  PLEASE run etc-update after
> > install and update ALL config files.
> >
> > New things for 1.8.6 release (just a quick list):
> >
> > - Fully support Linux-2.5.xx kernels!
> >
> > - Do not use tmpfs for caching anymore
> >
> > - A nice looking /etc/issue, thanks to v|rus (bug #16806).
> >
> > - Lots of fixes and improvements
> >
> >
> > If any issues, please let me know, or add a bug.
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
> Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)
> 
> iD8DBQE+enn7F7c0SsGMVKgRAm93AJ91cJzV4PjaPTH0n94fODAsOPF8OQCfbi9F
> joFl7vU9f4cdwtX5RoT4dus=
> =y3YI
> -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
> 
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
> 


-- 
Chuck Brewer
Registered Linux User #284015
Get my gpg public key at pgp.mit.edu!! Encrypted e-mail preferred.



[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-core] baselayout-1.8.6.4

[Martin Schlemmer]

On Thu, 20 Mar 2003 22:40:40 -0800
"C. Brewer" <cbrewer@stealthaccess.net> wrote:

> I apologize for the top-post, but its getting long. I second the
> motion for parallelized execution, but would like to go one better:
> named run-levels! I spoke with seemant about this quite a few times,
> but it appears our volunteer was too busy:) I think this is worth a
> glance: www.winterdrache.de/linux/newboot
> 

Actually we do have 'named' runlevels.  We only really use the runlevels
from init to get the system to boot or shutdown.  From there you just
define your runlevel (may it be named 'home', 'work', whatever) in
/etc/runlevels, and execute:

  # /sbin/rc work

for instance.  Sure, it may need some improvements, but why don't we
*rather* work on that, than reinvent the wheel ?



-- 

Martin Schlemmer
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer
Cape Town, South Africa


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-core] baselayout-1.8.6.4

[Klaus-J. Wolf]

Martin Schlemmer wrote:

> for instance.  Sure, it may need some improvements, but why don't we
> *rather* work on that, than reinvent the wheel ?
>
I might be a little off-topic, but I have a small suggestion which isn't 
covered by any of the drafts I have seen until now...

I've seen it so many times: The people start or stop a service on a 
*production* machine and they also want to change the boot settings 
accordingly, but of course without booting. Next time when the machine 
boots (maybe months later), it doesn't get up anymore.

Hit list of those fatal changes: typos in configuration, broken 
dependencies, broken links, untested firewall settings, lost kernel 
versions.

One of the small problems I see with the init mechanism as it is now 
that the dependencies are resolved during boot. I would like to see 
something like a test mode, or, the init mechanism could be modified so 
that it the final boot script is generated by compilation.

Only an idea...

Kind regards
k.j.




--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

[gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-core] baselayout-1.8.6.4

[Martin Schlemmer]

On Fri, 21 Mar 2003 03:33:28 +0100
Bart Lauwers <blauwers@gentoo.org> wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
> 
> How about paralellized execution of services that do not cross depend
> (to decrease time to boot)? Anyway some good ideas are here: 
> http://www.atnf.csiro.au/people/rgooch/linux/boot-scripts/
> 

We know about this.  Actually, I think Daniel contacted him, and he
was not what you could call very 'nice'.

Anyhow, we support his 'missing' and 'todo' features, and have more
advanced dependencies, aside from the parallelized execution.  I
will try to have a look, but I think having lightweight startup
scripts is better than bulky stuff that can do the parallel stuff.


Regards,

-- 

Martin Schlemmer
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer
Cape Town, South Africa


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] baselayout-1.8.6.4

[Norberto BENSA]

[-- Attachment #1: signed data --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 463 bytes --]

On Tuesday 18 March 2003 05:28 pm, Martin Schlemmer wrote:
>
> If any issues, please let me know, or add a bug.
>

Hello,

I did the upgrade on 4 boxes here, and in one of them, emerge baselayout 
failed to upgrade /etc/inittab. As a result, my system was unbooteable. I 
have to manually update the lines:

	si::sysinit:/sbin/rc sysinit
	rc::bootwait:/sbin/rc boot

to be able to boot.

BTW, this is baselayout-1.8.6.4-r1.

Regards,
Norberto

[-- Attachment #2: signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] baselayout-1.8.6.4

[Norberto BENSA]

[-- Attachment #1: signed data --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 867 bytes --]

On Sunday 23 March 2003 03:04 am, Norberto BENSA wrote:
> On Tuesday 18 March 2003 05:28 pm, Martin Schlemmer wrote:
> > If any issues, please let me know, or add a bug.
>
> failed to upgrade /etc/inittab. As a result, my system was unbooteable. I

And it failed because of this :

# Replace and backup /etc/inittab (unless already in new format)
if [ -f "${ROOT}/${inittab}" ] && \
	[ -z "$(grep 'si::sysinit:/sbin/rc sysinit' "${ROOT}/${inittab}")" ]


I've had the line '#si::sysinit:/sbin/rc sysinit,' because some time in the 
past I upgraded to 1.8.6.2 (or something like that,) then downgrade to 
1.8.5.8 and instead of replacing inittab, I just commented out those lines.

I guess a workaround could be:

	$(grep '^si::sysinit:/sbin/rc sysinit' "${ROOT}/${inittab}")


But I prefer the ._cfg0000_inittab thingy...

Regards,
Norberto

[-- Attachment #2: signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] baselayout-1.8.6.4

[Martin Schlemmer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1305 bytes --]

On Sun, 2003-03-23 at 09:12, Norberto BENSA wrote:
> On Sunday 23 March 2003 03:04 am, Norberto BENSA wrote:
> > On Tuesday 18 March 2003 05:28 pm, Martin Schlemmer wrote:
> > > If any issues, please let me know, or add a bug.
> >
> > failed to upgrade /etc/inittab. As a result, my system was unbooteable. I
> 
> And it failed because of this :
> 
> # Replace and backup /etc/inittab (unless already in new format)
> if [ -f "${ROOT}/${inittab}" ] && \
> 	[ -z "$(grep 'si::sysinit:/sbin/rc sysinit' "${ROOT}/${inittab}")" ]
> 
> 
> I've had the line '#si::sysinit:/sbin/rc sysinit,' because some time in the 
> past I upgraded to 1.8.6.2 (or something like that,) then downgrade to 
> 1.8.5.8 and instead of replacing inittab, I just commented out those lines.
> 
> I guess a workaround could be:
> 
> 	$(grep '^si::sysinit:/sbin/rc sysinit' "${ROOT}/${inittab}")
> 
> 
> But I prefer the ._cfg0000_inittab thingy...

Ah, right, thanks will fix.

Well, I would prefer the ._cfg0000_inittab thing as well, but I had to
do it this way, as many (most?) users do not etc-update when they
should.  Seems especially when there are quite a few updates =)


Regards,

-- 

Martin Schlemmer
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer
Cape Town, South Africa



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

Re: [gentoo-dev] baselayout-1.8.6.4

[Paul de Vrieze]

[-- Attachment #1: signed data --]
[-- Type: text/plain, Size: 613 bytes --]

On Sunday 23 March 2003 09:49, Martin Schlemmer wrote:
>
> Ah, right, thanks will fix.
>
> Well, I would prefer the ._cfg0000_inittab thing as well, but I had to
> do it this way, as many (most?) users do not etc-update when they
> should.  Seems especially when there are quite a few updates =)
>
What about having the post script automatically do the update for you unless 
that is not necesarry, in which case you still have the ._cfg.... file for 
manual updating if the user finds it necesarry.

Paul

-- 
Paul de Vrieze
Researcher
Mail: pauldv@cs.kun.nl
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net

[-- Attachment #2: signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] baselayout-1.8.6.4

[Martin Schlemmer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 836 bytes --]

On Sun, 2003-03-23 at 19:05, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
> On Sunday 23 March 2003 09:49, Martin Schlemmer wrote:
> >
> > Ah, right, thanks will fix.
> >
> > Well, I would prefer the ._cfg0000_inittab thing as well, but I had to
> > do it this way, as many (most?) users do not etc-update when they
> > should.  Seems especially when there are quite a few updates =)
> >
> What about having the post script automatically do the update for you unless 
> that is not necesarry, in which case you still have the ._cfg.... file for 
> manual updating if the user finds it necesarry.
> 

More or less what happens.  If it does not have the sysinit entry,
it will update it, else from there it will behave like normal.


-- 

Martin Schlemmer
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer
Cape Town, South Africa



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

Re: [gentoo-dev] baselayout-1.8.6.4

[Martin Schlemmer]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 686 bytes --]

On Sun, 2003-03-23 at 08:04, Norberto BENSA wrote:
> On Tuesday 18 March 2003 05:28 pm, Martin Schlemmer wrote:
> >
> > If any issues, please let me know, or add a bug.
> >
> 
> Hello,
> 
> I did the upgrade on 4 boxes here, and in one of them, emerge baselayout 
> failed to upgrade /etc/inittab. As a result, my system was unbooteable. I 
> have to manually update the lines:
> 
> 	si::sysinit:/sbin/rc sysinit
> 	rc::bootwait:/sbin/rc boot
> 
> to be able to boot.
> 
> BTW, this is baselayout-1.8.6.4-r1.

Any ideas as to why it failed ?


Thanks,

-- 

Martin Schlemmer
Gentoo Linux Developer, Desktop/System Team Developer
Cape Town, South Africa



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