[gentoo-dev] odds and ends

[gentoo-dev] odds and ends

[Robert Schrem]

> Currently about 200MB with lots of package-docs, and the 
> development tools, but if you unmerge
> all sys-devel packages beside the c++-libs and spython remove 
> /usr/doc and /usr/src and all the static libs in /lib and /usr/lib 
> you only need about 130MB and still have
> a runable system. 

Hmmm, wouldn't it be nice to have a gentoo system that can
boot from an 128 MB FlashDisk? There are som with PCMCIA
interface... No more noisy hard disk technologiy from the 
last century ... :)  Porbably a nice gift for my mom next christmas
for surfing on the internet with seat belts on... :)

robby 

Re: [gentoo-dev] odds and ends

[Achim Gottinger]

Robert Schrem wrote:

> > Currently about 200MB with lots of package-docs, and the
> > development tools, but if you unmerge
> > all sys-devel packages beside the c++-libs and spython remove
> > /usr/doc and /usr/src and all the static libs in /lib and /usr/lib
> > you only need about 130MB and still have
> > a runable system.
>
> Hmmm, wouldn't it be nice to have a gentoo system that can
> boot from an 128 MB FlashDisk? There are som with PCMCIA
> interface... No more noisy hard disk technologiy from the
> last century ... :)  Porbably a nice gift for my mom next christmas
> for surfing on the internet with seat belts on... :)
>

Hmm, you mean a system with X/netscape or qt-embeded/kconqueror that can
only be used
to connect to the internet and surf?
So you whould only need a FlashDisk and a PCMCIA modem or isdn adapter
and are able to use every  with
an PCMCIA adapter to connect to the internet.
Sounds interesting.
Maybe adding a jre would be nice too

achim


>
> robby
> _______________________________________________
> gentoo-dev mailing list
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> http://www.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev

Re: [gentoo-dev] odds and ends

[Gabriel]

I have done this with a stripped down redhat dist when I set up the thin clients for IBM Partnerworld 2000.  There are some good howtos on this, and you can experiment with doing the netbooting using Gero's 'netboot' package.

The real problem is with the lack of support for all of the plugins and things
that get pushed on the web using public.  People do fine until they run into
something that is an exception to the way the world does things.  Grandma won't want to use the thin client if it is running Linux; not today anyway.

At the show we had real problems with the java environment not working the same under linux as on the windows intellistations we were replacing.  

One more thing; flash roms have a finite number of read/writes.  You don't want to swap to the flash.  You don't really want to swap over NFS either.  Since you are talking about Java, Netscape, multimedia, and an affordable amount of RAM, you WILL need to deal with that eventuality.

--Gabriel

On Thu, 25 Jan 2001, Achim Gottinger wrote:

> Robert Schrem wrote:
> 
> > > Currently about 200MB with lots of package-docs, and the
> > > development tools, but if you unmerge
> > > all sys-devel packages beside the c++-libs and spython remove
> > > /usr/doc and /usr/src and all the static libs in /lib and /usr/lib
> > > you only need about 130MB and still have
> > > a runable system.
> >
> > Hmmm, wouldn't it be nice to have a gentoo system that can
> > boot from an 128 MB FlashDisk? There are som with PCMCIA
> > interface... No more noisy hard disk technologiy from the
> > last century ... :)  Porbably a nice gift for my mom next christmas
> > for surfing on the internet with seat belts on... :)
> >
> 
> Hmm, you mean a system with X/netscape or qt-embeded/kconqueror that can
> only be used
> to connect to the internet and surf?
> So you whould only need a FlashDisk and a PCMCIA modem or isdn adapter
> and are able to use every  with
> an PCMCIA adapter to connect to the internet.
> Sounds interesting.
> Maybe adding a jre would be nice too
> 
> achim
> 
> 
> >
> > robby
> > _______________________________________________
> > gentoo-dev mailing list
> > gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> > http://www.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
> 
> _______________________________________________
> gentoo-dev mailing list
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> http://www.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
> 

Re: [gentoo-dev] odds and ends

[Achim Gottinger]

Gabriel wrote:

> I have done this with a stripped down redhat dist when I set up the thin clients for IBM Partnerworld 2000.  There are some good howtos on this, and you can experiment with doing the netbooting using Gero's 'netboot' package.
>
> The real problem is with the lack of support for all of the plugins and things
> that get pushed on the web using public.  People do fine until they run into
> something that is an exception to the way the world does things.  Grandma won't want to use the thin client if it is running Linux; not today anyway.
>

My grandman won't even touch a computer no matter what os is running, but anyway.
Having a flag to trigger a stripped down build whould make live much easier.

>
> At the show we had real problems with the java environment not working the same under linux as on the windows intellistations we were replacing.

True, we had similar problems during my work at BMW with some applets but they had a special version of netscape running with a modified jre, so netscape solved this problem.

>
>
> One more thing; flash roms have a finite number of read/writes.  You don't want to swap to the flash.  You don't really want to swap over NFS either.  Since you are talking about Java, Netscape, multimedia, and an affordable amount of RAM, you WILL need to deal with that eventuality.

Hmm, a solution might be using the flash roms as a ro-filesystem and storing all files that need write acces in a tar-ball on the flash-tom that gets unpacked to a ram-disk on boot and build on shutdown.
But that solution would require a big peace of ram.

~achim*

>
>
> --Gabriel
>
> On Thu, 25 Jan 2001, Achim Gottinger wrote:
>
> > Robert Schrem wrote:
> >
> > > > Currently about 200MB with lots of package-docs, and the
> > > > development tools, but if you unmerge
> > > > all sys-devel packages beside the c++-libs and spython remove
> > > > /usr/doc and /usr/src and all the static libs in /lib and /usr/lib
> > > > you only need about 130MB and still have
> > > > a runable system.
> > >
> > > Hmmm, wouldn't it be nice to have a gentoo system that can
> > > boot from an 128 MB FlashDisk? There are som with PCMCIA
> > > interface... No more noisy hard disk technologiy from the
> > > last century ... :)  Porbably a nice gift for my mom next christmas
> > > for surfing on the internet with seat belts on... :)
> > >
> >
> > Hmm, you mean a system with X/netscape or qt-embeded/kconqueror that can
> > only be used
> > to connect to the internet and surf?
> > So you whould only need a FlashDisk and a PCMCIA modem or isdn adapter
> > and are able to use every  with
> > an PCMCIA adapter to connect to the internet.
> > Sounds interesting.
> > Maybe adding a jre would be nice too
> >
> > achim
> >
> >
> > >
> > > robby
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > gentoo-dev mailing list
> > > gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> > > http://www.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > gentoo-dev mailing list
> > gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> > http://www.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
> >
>
> _______________________________________________
> gentoo-dev mailing list
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> http://www.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev

Re: [gentoo-dev] odds and ends

[mats pettersson]

On Thu, 25 Jan 2001, Achim Gottinger wrote:

> Gabriel wrote:
>
> > I have done this with a stripped down redhat dist when I set up the thin clients for IBM Partnerworld 2000.  There are some good howtos on this, and you can experiment with doing the netbooting using Gero's 'netboot' package.
> >
> > The real problem is with the lack of support for all of the plugins and things
> > that get pushed on the web using public.  People do fine until they run into
> > something that is an exception to the way the world does things.  Grandma won't want to use the thin client if it is running Linux; not today anyway.
> >
>
> My grandman won't even touch a computer no matter what os is running, but anyway.
> Having a flag to trigger a stripped down build whould make live much easier.
>
> >
> > At the show we had real problems with the java environment not working the same under linux as on the windows intellistations we were replacing.
>
> True, we had similar problems during my work at BMW with some applets but they had a special version of netscape running with a modified jre, so netscape solved this problem.
>
> >
> >
> > One more thing; flash roms have a finite number of read/writes.  You don't want to swap to the flash.  You don't really want to swap over NFS either.  Since you are talking about Java, Netscape, multimedia, and an affordable amount of RAM, you WILL need to deal with that eventuality.
>
> Hmm, a solution might be using the flash roms as a ro-filesystem and storing all files that need write acces in a tar-ball on the flash-tom that gets unpacked to a ram-disk on boot and build on shutdown.
> But that solution would require a big peace of ram.

me and my friend has builded diskless cluster using this method storing
the readwrite files in a tar archive on the cluster server and unpacks
into a ramdrive it works great but as said above it takes som ram

>
> ~achim*
>
> >
> >
> > --Gabriel
> >
> > On Thu, 25 Jan 2001, Achim Gottinger wrote:
> >
> > > Robert Schrem wrote:
> > >
> > > > > Currently about 200MB with lots of package-docs, and the
> > > > > development tools, but if you unmerge
> > > > > all sys-devel packages beside the c++-libs and spython remove
> > > > > /usr/doc and /usr/src and all the static libs in /lib and /usr/lib
> > > > > you only need about 130MB and still have
> > > > > a runable system.
> > > >
> > > > Hmmm, wouldn't it be nice to have a gentoo system that can
> > > > boot from an 128 MB FlashDisk? There are som with PCMCIA
> > > > interface... No more noisy hard disk technologiy from the
> > > > last century ... :)  Porbably a nice gift for my mom next christmas
> > > > for surfing on the internet with seat belts on... :)
> > > >
> > >
> > > Hmm, you mean a system with X/netscape or qt-embeded/kconqueror that can
> > > only be used
> > > to connect to the internet and surf?
> > > So you whould only need a FlashDisk and a PCMCIA modem or isdn adapter
> > > and are able to use every  with
> > > an PCMCIA adapter to connect to the internet.
> > > Sounds interesting.
> > > Maybe adding a jre would be nice too
> > >
> > > achim
> > >
> > >
> > > >
> > > > robby
> > > > _______________________________________________
> > > > gentoo-dev mailing list
> > > > gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> > > > http://www.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
> > >
> > > _______________________________________________
> > > gentoo-dev mailing list
> > > gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> > > http://www.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
> > >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > gentoo-dev mailing list
> > gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> > http://www.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
>
> _______________________________________________
> gentoo-dev mailing list
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> http://www.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev
>

-- 

Located @ N65°61746' E22°12535' (WGS84)
------ Hiroshime 45, Tjernobyl 86, Windows 95, Windows 98, WinY2K ------
Unix IS user friendly --- its just selective about who its friends are.

Re: [gentoo-dev] odds and ends

[drobbins]

On Thu, Jan 25, 2001 at 11:27:43AM +0100, Robert Schrem wrote:
> > Currently about 200MB with lots of package-docs, and the 
> > development tools, but if you unmerge
> > all sys-devel packages beside the c++-libs and spython remove 
> > /usr/doc and /usr/src and all the static libs in /lib and /usr/lib 
> > you only need about 130MB and still have
> > a runable system. 
> 
> Hmmm, wouldn't it be nice to have a gentoo system that can
> boot from an 128 MB FlashDisk? There are som with PCMCIA
> interface... No more noisy hard disk technologiy from the 
> last century ... :)  Porbably a nice gift for my mom next christmas
> for surfing on the internet with seat belts on... :)

Creating a tiny libc build may be something we do after 1.0 is
released.  However, it may be best to simply create a new CVS tree
instead of modifying our current ebuilds, since I imagine that
the two projects will be very different.

Best Regards,

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

[gentoo-dev] odds and ends

[drobbins]

Hi All,

I just wanted to give you all an update on Gentoo Linux development.

General Notes
=============

Gentoo Linux 1.0_rc4-pre2
-------------------------

As you probably know, Gentoo Linux 1.0_rc4-pre2 is on ibiblio.org.  This is 
a test version that should be installed by all active developers.  When all
known quirks have been fixed, Achim will roll out a 1.0_rc4.  So far,
1.0_rc4-pre2 is looking a lot better than 1.0_rc3.  We're stomping on bugs
and Gentoo Linux is getting more and more refined.

1.0_rc4-pre2 is fully compatible with all modern Intel and Intel-compatible
processors, from the i486 on up.  While 1.0_rc4-pre2 is optimized for the
486, Achim plans to build several different versions of 1.0_rc4 optimized for
various processors.  1.0_rc4-pre2 has been tested on K6 systems and works
perfectly.  The problem we had with the K6 was due to some inline assembly in
glibc -- included based on the value of the HOST environment variable.  Since
we had the HOST set to i686-pc-linux-gnu, some i686-specific instructions
were included in glibc -- ones that the K6 didn't like.

Developer-specific Notes
========================

Changelog Issues
----------------

Developers, when you update the ChangeLog (/usr/portage/ChangeLog), make sure
that you stick to our "standard" format.  Each package addition/modification/
deletion includes a single line in our standard format, followed on the next
line by a _mandatory_ developer user name, followed by optional line(s) of
comments and a blank line.  It's _not_ ok to do stuff like this:

new foo/bar-1.0
new foo/oni-2.0
drobbins

You need to do this instead

new foo/bar-1.0
drobbins

new foo/oni-1.0
drobbins

sys-* layout
------------

Achim and I have resolved how to determine what goes in the sys-* categories.
We are breaking with FreeBSD tradition by making the sys-* categories contain
_only_ a barebones, minimal system -- the minimal Gentoo system that can still
recompile itself, with a few exceptions.  Previously, what was included in
sys-* was more of a subjective thing, i.e. what I would like to see in a basic
Gentoo Linux server install, the tools I personally like, etc.

Rather than do this, we're going to be integrating some new functionality into
Portage that's going to be very, very nice and will allow everyone to have the
kind of "base" system that they like.  Portage will recognize your selection not
only at install time, but throughout the lifetime of your system, prompting you
to upgrade or add new packages when necessary.

ebuild design
-------------

Also, another semi-important note.  It is no longer necessary to define the "A"
variable in an ebuild.  Portage automatically determines the proper archive names
from the SRC_URI if present (and all current ebuilds are required to have valid
SRC_URIs.)  You can use "A" if you like, but leave it out if you prefer.

That's it for now.  Sorry for being a bit distant for the last few weeks --
I've been busy writing a bunch of new articles for IBM.  Now that I'm (nearly)
caught up, you should start seeing me more often. 

Best Regards,

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] odds and ends

[Thomas Flavel]

On Wed, Jan 24, 2001 at 03:29:04PM -0700, drobbins@gentoo.org wrote:

> 1.0_rc4-pre2 is fully compatible with all modern Intel and Intel-compatible
> processors, from the i486 on up.  While 1.0_rc4-pre2 is optimized for the
> 486, Achim plans to build several different versions of 1.0_rc4 optimized for
> various processors.  1.0_rc4-pre2 has been tested on K6 systems and works

I don't understand why not a 386? I kind of expected the distcd to be 386
binaries, and then to compile and install optimised to whatever my processor
happens to be? What am I mis-understanding? ;)

How would gentoo be installed on a 386?


> sys-* layout
> ------------
> 
> Achim and I have resolved how to determine what goes in the sys-* categories.
> We are breaking with FreeBSD tradition by making the sys-* categories contain
> _only_ a barebones, minimal system -- the minimal Gentoo system that can still
> recompile itself, with a few exceptions.  Previously, what was included in
> sys-* was more of a subjective thing, i.e. what I would like to see in a basic
> Gentoo Linux server install, the tools I personally like, etc.
> 
> Rather than do this, we're going to be integrating some new functionality into
> Portage that's going to be very, very nice and will allow everyone to have the
> kind of "base" system that they like.  Portage will recognize your selection not
> only at install time, but throughout the lifetime of your system, prompting you
> to upgrade or add new packages when necessary.

Excellent. Roughly what size is minimum now?


- Tom

Re: [gentoo-dev] odds and ends

[drobbins]

On Wed, Jan 24, 2001 at 10:43:53PM +0000, Thomas Flavel wrote:
> > 1.0_rc4-pre2 is fully compatible with all modern Intel and Intel-compatible
> > processors, from the i486 on up.  While 1.0_rc4-pre2 is optimized for the
> > 486, Achim plans to build several different versions of 1.0_rc4 optimized for
> > various processors.  1.0_rc4-pre2 has been tested on K6 systems and works
> 
> I don't understand why not a 386? I kind of expected the distcd to be 386
> binaries, and then to compile and install optimised to whatever my processor
> happens to be? What am I mis-understanding? ;)
> 
> How would gentoo be installed on a 386?

Very slowly.  386's and bzip2-compressed packages don't exactly get along :)
If there's a need, we can create a 386-compatible build.

> Excellent. Roughly what size is minimum now?

Do you mean the minimum HD space needed for installation?  I'd guess about 400Mb
of HD space.  We haven't specifically attempted to "squeeze" the base install
into a minimum of space.  If we did, we could probably get it to live in around
250Mb, maybe less.  If we started recompiling packages and linking them to a tiny
libc, we might be able to get this down to <100Mb :)  But, since we're all power
users, this isn't something that we're focusing on right now.

Best Regards,

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] odds and ends

[Thomas Flavel]

On Wed, Jan 24, 2001 at 04:08:51PM -0700, drobbins@gentoo.org wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 24, 2001 at 10:43:53PM +0000, Thomas Flavel wrote:
> > > 1.0_rc4-pre2 is fully compatible with all modern Intel and Intel-compatible
> > > processors, from the i486 on up.  While 1.0_rc4-pre2 is optimized for the
> > > 486, Achim plans to build several different versions of 1.0_rc4 optimized for
> > > various processors.  1.0_rc4-pre2 has been tested on K6 systems and works
> > 
> > I don't understand why not a 386? I kind of expected the distcd to be 386
> > binaries, and then to compile and install optimised to whatever my processor
> > happens to be? What am I mis-understanding? ;)
> > 
> > How would gentoo be installed on a 386?
> 
> Very slowly.  386's and bzip2-compressed packages don't exactly get along :)

:) Is it feasible to have two alternate install routes; one compiling from scratch
and the other pre-compiled?

> If there's a need, we can create a 386-compatible build.

I'm just thinking along the lines of a minimum binary system where absolutley
needed, and compiling specifically everywhere else? I realise this would be
slow to install on slower systems, but, since we're all power users... ;)

Seriously though, I do think this would be a nice feature, unless there's some
practicality reason I'm missing.

> > Excellent. Roughly what size is minimum now?
> 
> Do you mean the minimum HD space needed for installation?  I'd guess about 400Mb
> of HD space.  We haven't specifically attempted to "squeeze" the base install
> into a minimum of space.  If we did, we could probably get it to live in around
> 250Mb, maybe less.  If we started recompiling packages and linking them to a tiny
> libc, we might be able to get this down to <100Mb :)  But, since we're all power
> users, this isn't something that we're focusing on right now.

Ok

- Tom

Re: [gentoo-dev] odds and ends

[drobbins]

On Wed, Jan 24, 2001 at 11:35:16PM +0000, Thomas Flavel wrote:
> > > How would gentoo be installed on a 386?
> > 
> > Very slowly.  386's and bzip2-compressed packages don't exactly get along :)
> 
> :) Is it feasible to have two alternate install routes; one compiling from scratch
> and the other pre-compiled?
> 
> > If there's a need, we can create a 386-compatible build.
> 
> I'm just thinking along the lines of a minimum binary system where absolutley
> needed, and compiling specifically everywhere else? I realise this would be
> slow to install on slower systems, but, since we're all power users... ;)
> 
> Seriously though, I do think this would be a nice feature, unless there's some
> practicality reason I'm missing.

Right now, it's possible to install the minimal sys.tbz2 tarball and build everything
else using portage.  If you like, you can then remerge the sys binaries so that they
have your desired optimization settings:

ebuild foo.ebuild remerge

The only one you don't want to remerge is the "baselayout" ebuild, since this will wipe
out any changes you've made to your passwd, group, fstab, etc.

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] odds and ends

[Achim Gottinger]

Thomas Flavel wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 24, 2001 at 03:29:04PM -0700, drobbins@gentoo.org wrote:
>
> > 1.0_rc4-pre2 is fully compatible with all modern Intel and Intel-compatible
> > processors, from the i486 on up.  While 1.0_rc4-pre2 is optimized for the
> > 486, Achim plans to build several different versions of 1.0_rc4 optimized for
> > various processors.  1.0_rc4-pre2 has been tested on K6 systems and works
>
> I don't understand why not a 386? I kind of expected the distcd to be 386
> binaries, and then to compile and install optimised to whatever my processor
> happens to be? What am I mis-understanding? ;)
>
> How would gentoo be installed on a 386?

You can build all the sys packages with a CHOST of i386-pc-linux-gnu and merge them
to some temporary place.
Then chroot there and recompile and remerge all packages. Eighter do this a few times
or follow the dependencies
starting by glibc to be sure you have no statically linked in i486 assembler code in
there. Then you can build the
other stuff you need and you should have a i386 based system.
Do you still use i386 ? My oldest is an i486SX/25 with a 200MB HD running as a
firewall here under gentoo.
The i486 version is definetly slower that the i686 version we had before using i386
won't make things better.
If there really is a need for a i386 version I can build one.

>
>
> > sys-* layout
> > ------------
> >
> > Achim and I have resolved how to determine what goes in the sys-* categories.
> > We are breaking with FreeBSD tradition by making the sys-* categories contain
> > _only_ a barebones, minimal system -- the minimal Gentoo system that can still
> > recompile itself, with a few exceptions.  Previously, what was included in
> > sys-* was more of a subjective thing, i.e. what I would like to see in a basic
> > Gentoo Linux server install, the tools I personally like, etc.
> >
> > Rather than do this, we're going to be integrating some new functionality into
> > Portage that's going to be very, very nice and will allow everyone to have the
> > kind of "base" system that they like.  Portage will recognize your selection not
> > only at install time, but throughout the lifetime of your system, prompting you
> > to upgrade or add new packages when necessary.
>
> Excellent. Roughly what size is minimum now?

Currently about 200MB with lots of package-docs, and the development tools, but if
you unmerge
all sys-devel packages beside the c++-libs and spython remove /usr/doc and /usr/src
and all the static libs in /lib and /usr/lib you only need about 130MB and still have
a runable system. Other optimizations could be turning of building
of localdata-stuff in glibc removing unneccesary zoneinfo and terminfo entrys...

Hmm, maybe we should introduce a new USE flag to trigger build of packages with only
the really neccesary stuff.

~Achim

>
>
> - Tom
> _______________________________________________
> gentoo-dev mailing list
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> http://www.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev

Re: [gentoo-dev] odds and ends

[Thomas Flavel]

On Thu, Jan 25, 2001 at 12:10:38AM +0100, Achim Gottinger wrote:
> Thomas Flavel wrote:
> 
> > On Wed, Jan 24, 2001 at 03:29:04PM -0700, drobbins@gentoo.org wrote:
> >
> > > 1.0_rc4-pre2 is fully compatible with all modern Intel and Intel-compatible
> > > processors, from the i486 on up.  While 1.0_rc4-pre2 is optimized for the
> > > 486, Achim plans to build several different versions of 1.0_rc4 optimized for
> > > various processors.  1.0_rc4-pre2 has been tested on K6 systems and works
> >
> > I don't understand why not a 386? I kind of expected the distcd to be 386
> > binaries, and then to compile and install optimised to whatever my processor
> > happens to be? What am I mis-understanding? ;)
> >
> > How would gentoo be installed on a 386?
> 
> You can build all the sys packages with a CHOST of i386-pc-linux-gnu and merge them
> to some temporary place.
> Then chroot there and recompile and remerge all packages. Eighter do this a few times
> or follow the dependencies
> starting by glibc to be sure you have no statically linked in i486 assembler code in
> there. Then you can build the
> other stuff you need and you should have a i386 based system.
> Do you still use i386 ? My oldest is an i486SX/25 with a 200MB HD running as a
> firewall here under gentoo.

No, I don't use any 386s, I'm just curious :)

> The i486 version is definetly slower that the i686 version we had before using i386
> won't make things better.

Is the performace hit really that great?

> If there really is a need for a i386 version I can build one.

I don't need one myself :)


> > > sys-* layout
> > > ------------
> > >
> > > Achim and I have resolved how to determine what goes in the sys-* categories.
> > > We are breaking with FreeBSD tradition by making the sys-* categories contain
> > > _only_ a barebones, minimal system -- the minimal Gentoo system that can still
> > > recompile itself, with a few exceptions.  Previously, what was included in
> > > sys-* was more of a subjective thing, i.e. what I would like to see in a basic
> > > Gentoo Linux server install, the tools I personally like, etc.
> > >
> > > Rather than do this, we're going to be integrating some new functionality into
> > > Portage that's going to be very, very nice and will allow everyone to have the
> > > kind of "base" system that they like.  Portage will recognize your selection not
> > > only at install time, but throughout the lifetime of your system, prompting you
> > > to upgrade or add new packages when necessary.
> >
> > Excellent. Roughly what size is minimum now?
> 
> Currently about 200MB with lots of package-docs, and the development tools, but if
> you unmerge
> all sys-devel packages beside the c++-libs and spython remove /usr/doc and /usr/src
> and all the static libs in /lib and /usr/lib you only need about 130MB and still have
> a runable system. Other optimizations could be turning of building
> of localdata-stuff in glibc removing unneccesary zoneinfo and terminfo entrys...
> 
> Hmm, maybe we should introduce a new USE flag to trigger build of packages with only
> the really neccesary stuff.
>

imo it would be great to be able to do that

- Tom

Re: [gentoo-dev] odds and ends

[drobbins]

On Thu, Jan 25, 2001 at 12:10:38AM +0100, Achim Gottinger wrote:

> Hmm, maybe we should introduce a new USE flag to trigger build of packages with only
> the really neccesary stuff.

I think an easier way would be to create a "sys-strip" script which would do things like:

rm -rf /usr/doc
rm -rf /usr/info, 
etc.

I don't think many people will need this functionality, and I'd rather not
complicate our existing ebuilds just to allow the creation of a 100Mb Gentoo
Linux system.  I just bought a 45Gb IBM hard drive for about $130 about a month
ago... and there are plenty of used 2-6Gb drives that people are willing to
give away these days.

I think reducing the footprint of Gentoo Linux *may* become a priority if we
can link some things to a minimal libc, reducing the executable footprint and
allowing more code to reside in the CPU cache.  This is a performance issue
rather than a pure storage issue, however.  I'd be supportive of a special USE
variable to enable a tiny libc. :)

Best Regards,

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] odds and ends

[Achim Gottinger]

drobbins@gentoo.org wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 25, 2001 at 12:10:38AM +0100, Achim Gottinger wrote:
>
> > Hmm, maybe we should introduce a new USE flag to trigger build of packages with only
> > the really neccesary stuff.
>
> I think an easier way would be to create a "sys-strip" script which would do things like:
>
> rm -rf /usr/doc
> rm -rf /usr/info,
> etc.

Hmm, I would use this flag for things like

build glibc without support for all locales, building ncurses without c++ extension and
without static libs, remove
unneccesary binaries from util-linux...
But this is a post 1.0 idea and it could be combined with linking agains dietlibc or
possibly a shared dietlibc.

>
>
> I don't think many people will need this functionality, and I'd rather not
> complicate our existing ebuilds just to allow the creation of a 100Mb Gentoo
> Linux system.  I just bought a 45Gb IBM hard drive for about $130 about a month
> ago... and there are plenty of used 2-6Gb drives that people are willing to
> give away these days.

True but linux helps us protecting our enviroment by reducing the amount of pc-scrap. :-)
My 486SX/25 system is still fast enogh for my DSL internet connection and running qmail.
(squid was terribly slow :-) )

>
>
> I think reducing the footprint of Gentoo Linux *may* become a priority if we
> can link some things to a minimal libc, reducing the executable footprint and
> allowing more code to reside in the CPU cache.  This is a performance issue
> rather than a pure storage issue, however.  I'd be supportive of a special USE
> variable to enable a tiny libc. :)

Take a look at this
http://www.fefe.de/embutils/



>

>
>
> Best Regards,
>
> --
> Daniel Robbins                                  <drobbins@gentoo.org>
> President/CEO                                   http://www.gentoo.org
> Gentoo Technologies, Inc.
> _______________________________________________
> gentoo-dev mailing list
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> http://www.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev