Re: [gentoo-dev] Bug report, Portage question, No sources included

Re: [gentoo-dev] Bug report, Portage question, No sources included

[drobbins]

On Sun, Jan 07, 2001 at 07:51:58PM -0600, Justin Vander Ziel wrote:

> After having read through some comparisons of the various software management
> options here http://kitenet.net/~joey/pkg-comp/ , here
> http://vip.hpnc.com/~cbbrowne/linuxsysconfig.html and finally in the
> freshmeat article I feel like I have at least a general idea of where Portage
> is going. I have a couple of questions I am hoping someone in this list would
> answer for me * I have a slow dialup connection and I often download the
> software I need at work where I have a T1 and either carry it home on a
> Syquest 200Mb cartridge or burn a CD for myself there (which is how I got
> Gentoo in the first place). I'm not sure I am ever going to want to rsync my
> distro because I don't see a way of determining how long it's going to take
> without running an audit of my system. Any suggestions?  * What is the
> difference between Portage and e-build? Where does one begin and the other
> start? I'm familiar with Daniel's article that was posted on IBM about the
> e-build system (http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/library/bash3.html) *
> Perhaps I'm thinking in Microsoft mode here. My question is, is there an
> uninstall script ready now for ebuild? The autofs included with rc3 seems to
> be missing the pars_sun.so library file so I wanted to uninstall it and
> install the later version from the source code. I could list the files from
> the tbz2 file and do it by hand or I've even considered writing a script to
> do it for me but this seems to be a logical piece of the puzzle that is
> missing. (is that why this is called a beta release? B )

We do have a package uninstaller.  To use it, type:

# portage-unmerge net-misc/pkg-1.2.3-r5

You can also do this by typing:

# ebuild /path/to/version/exactly/matching/the/one/installed/foo.ebuild unmerge

Since we back up all installed ebuilds in /var/db/pkg, this will always work too:

# ebuild /var/db/pkg/net-misc/pkg-1.2.3-r5/pkg-1.2.3-r5.ebuild unmerge

As far as doing rsyncs, what I'd do is this.  Bring your Syquest to work, and
download the sources using rsync.  Then bring the Syquest home and rsync from
the Syquest to /usr/portage.  Then, continue to keep the Syquest up-to-date
by using rsync.  Let me know if you have any questions about how to do this.

Best Regards,

-- 
Daniel Robbins					<drobbins@gentoo.org>
President/CEO					http://www.gentoo.org 
Gentoo Technologies, Inc.			

Re: [gentoo-dev] Bug report, Portage question, No sources included

[drobbins]

On Sun, Jan 07, 2001 at 07:51:58PM -0600, Justin Vander Ziel wrote:

> * What is the difference between Portage and e-build? Where does one begin
> and the other start? I'm familiar with Daniel's article that was posted on
> IBM about the e-build system
> (http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/library/bash3.html)

OK, forgot to answer this.  Portage is the official name for the system as a whole.
Portage uses ebuild scripts and the "ebuild" program right now; this may evolve 
into something more advanced as time goes on.  But the entire system will still
continue to be called Portage.

-- 
Daniel Robbins					<drobbins@gentoo.org>
President/CEO					http://www.gentoo.org 
Gentoo Technologies, Inc.			

Re: [gentoo-dev] Bug report, Portage question, No sources included

[drobbins]

On Sun, Jan 07, 2001 at 07:51:58PM -0600, Justin Vander Ziel wrote:

> Unless you're thinking of modules, I think it would be better to include a
> few kernel variations and the dd command in the boot cd. I thought it was odd
> that this was omitted anyways. I had to create a boot disk in Windows using
> rawrite. (well actually, I learned later that I really was able to install
> grub from the grub prompt on the CD. Since I had never used GRUB and always
> LILO, this business was all new to me then.)

We're working on improving hardware support.  The main reason there's no PCMCIA
support is that I don't have a laptop.  So, I can't really test any PCMCIA stuff.

> Actually I may be looking in the wrong place, but all that I found in
> /usr/src/linux were the kernel headers which were installed with sys.tbz2 -
> but no source code. Actually, I did not find source code ANYWHERE which
> surprised me given the idea behind this distro to roll your own. Or perhaps I
> misunderstood and the idea is to UPDATE with source code?? (See my first
> question) Or perhaps, even worse, I'm more of a newbie than I think.

When you do this:

# ebuild foo-1.2.ebuild merge

The sources for foo-1.2 will be automatically downloaded either from the Gentoo
Linux mirror, or from the original download site.  The downloaded files are
stored in /usr/portage/distfiles.  We'll most likely be providing a "sources"
ISO image soon for those who don't have a fairly decent link to the Internet.

-- 
Daniel Robbins					<drobbins@gentoo.org>
President/CEO					http://www.gentoo.org 
Gentoo Technologies, Inc.			

Re: [gentoo-dev] Bug report, Portage question, No sources included

[Achim Gottinger]

Justin Vander Ziel wrote:

> The following were included with a message that I e-mailed directly to
> Daniel Robbins and he asked me to post. BUG report in order of
> (percieved) importance (Gentoo 1.0rc3 ISO image).
> 1. the modprobe line in the modules init file in /etc/rc.d/init.d/
> does not
> parse the entire line which it should do especially for the alsa-sound
>
> module. I fixed the line that reads "modprobe ${1}" to read "modprobe
> ${*}"
> and that seems to have fixed it for me; my alsa-sound modules load
> now.
> ** this one has already been fixed in the CVS tree by Daniel according
> to his response.
> 2. dependency check in the alsa-libs package requires kernel
> >2.4.0-test11
> which will obviously not work with the recommended and included
> configuration.
> 3. the automount daemon dies as soon as it is loaded.the error message
> from /var/log/daemon.log is:
>     "lookup(file):cannot open parse modules sun
> (/usr/lib/autofs//parse_sun.so: cannot open shared object file: no
> such file or directory)"
> * I was unable to locate the parse_sun.so file anywhere on my system.*
> the autofs4 daemon requires the alias "alias autofs autofs4" to be in
> the modules.conf according to Jeremy Fitzhardings' readme in the
> autofs download page (see http://www.goop.org/~jeremy/autofs ).
> However inserting the alias did not fix the above problem for me
> assuming for some strange reason that the missing file complaint was
> misguided. There is a newer daemon package version
> autofs-4.0.0pre9.tar.gz in the above directory which I hope to try
> out.Question about Portage, et al.
>
> This is fixed now !!
>
> Use autofs-3.1.7-r1.ebuild and it works.
>
> Bye Achim
>
>  After having read through some comparisons of the various software
> management options here http://kitenet.net/~joey/pkg-comp/ , here
> http://vip.hpnc.com/~cbbrowne/linuxsysconfig.html and finally in the
> freshmeat article I feel like I have at least a general idea of where
> Portage is going. I have a couple of questions I am hoping someone in
> this list would answer for me* I have a slow dialup connection and I
> often download the software I need at work where I have a T1 and
> either carry it home on a Syquest 200Mb cartridge or burn a CD for
> myself there (which is how I got Gentoo in the first place). I'm not
> sure I am ever going to want to rsync my distro because I don't see a
> way of determining how long it's going to take without running an
> audit of my system. Any suggestions?* What is the difference between
> Portage and e-build? Where does one begin and the other start? I'm
> familiar with Daniel's article that was posted on IBM about the
> e-build system
> (http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/library/bash3.html)* Perhaps
> I'm thinking in Microsoft mode here. My question is, is there an
> uninstall script ready now for ebuild? The autofs included with rc3
> seems to be missing the pars_sun.so library file so I wanted to
> uninstall it and install the later version from the source code. I
> could list the files from the tbz2 file and do it by hand or I've even
> considered writing a script to do it for me but this seems to be a
> logical piece of the puzzle that is missing. (is that why this is
> called a beta release? B )  From the Digest Jerry A!
> <jerry@thehutt.org> wrote:
> >Can we please have pcmcia support in the default kernel?  It's a real
>
> >pain having to install off the CD and then build a new kernel, put it
> on
> >floppy and then move to that to the machine in question.  It'll be a
> >bigger pain if that laptop ends up being my only working machine.
> 8( Unless you're thinking of modules, I think it would be better to
> include a few kernel variations and the dd command in the boot cd. I
> thought it was odd that this was omitted anyways. I had to create a
> boot disk in Windows using rawrite. (well actually, I learned later
> that I really was able to install grub from the grub prompt on the CD.
> Since I had never used GRUB and always LILO, this business was all new
> to me then.) Thomas Flavel <thomasfl@cogs.susx.ac.uk> wrote:
> >Glad to see there's finally a mailing list, now I can bug everyone
> and
> >not just Daniel personally... ;)Ditto for me.>Hmm, I recall asking if
> rc3 could have gcc and the kernel source
> >available from the boot cd - I see the kernel source code is in the
> >packages directory, but I think there may have been a
> >mis-communication...Actually I may be looking in the wrong place, but
> all that I found in /usr/src/linux were the kernel headers which were
> installed with sys.tbz2 - but no source code. Actually, I did not find
> source code ANYWHERE which surprised me given the idea behind this
> distro to roll your own. Or perhaps I misunderstood and the idea is to
> UPDATE with source code?? (See my first question) Or perhaps, even
> worse, I'm more of a newbie than I think. >I actually meant that gcc
> be executable from boot.img so that a kernel can be compiled directly
> from the boot cd
> >(onto ramfs presumably, unless you mount anything else) without
> having to install anything to a hard disk - I for one would find >this
> very useful, and I'm surprised I haven't seen any other distros do
> this. This sounds like a logical extension of the Portage system and a
> good idea to me, too. Nuff said, perhaps too much. Justin Vander
> Zielmailto:zielot@thebestisp.com