[gentoo-dev] ACCEPT_KEYWORDS + bootstrap.sh

[gentoo-dev] ACCEPT_KEYWORDS + bootstrap.sh

[Per Wigren]

Hi!

I'm a Gentoo user since about 2 years... I just installed 1.4rc3 on another 
computer and noticed this bug (?)..

During the installation I set ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~x86" in /etc/make.conf, but 
when running bootstrap.sh it gets ignored.. So when running "emerge system" 
afterwards it has to rebuild both gcc and glibc AGAIN, which took about 10 
extra hours for those two packages alone on the old P2/266 i was installing 
on... Quite annoying...  I hope this gets fixed before 1.4final ;)

Regards,
Per Wigren

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] ACCEPT_KEYWORDS + bootstrap.sh

[Nicholas Hockey]

same thing here but was a while back, now before i do anything i emerge
ccache just so if that happens i don't have to wait another few hours 

ccache+distcc+gentoo=awsome!

On Sun, 2003-03-16 at 04:22, Per Wigren wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> I'm a Gentoo user since about 2 years... I just installed 1.4rc3 on another 
> computer and noticed this bug (?)..
> 
> During the installation I set ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~x86" in /etc/make.conf, but 
> when running bootstrap.sh it gets ignored.. So when running "emerge system" 
> afterwards it has to rebuild both gcc and glibc AGAIN, which took about 10 
> extra hours for those two packages alone on the old P2/266 i was installing 
> on... Quite annoying...  I hope this gets fixed before 1.4final ;)
> 
> Regards,
> Per Wigren
> 
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
-- 
Nicholas Hockey (Tilt) <tilt@bluecherry.net>
Unix Administrator
Encrypted E-Mail is preferred..
-------------------------------------------------------------------- 
GnuPG KeyID 4EDE2B84
Key fingerprint = B916 6032 BE3D 490D 2A08  F1BC 948A A4C1 4EDE 2B84
HKP: gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 4EDE2B84
LDAP: gpg --keyserver ldap://keyserver.pgp.com --recv-keys 4EDE2B84
--------------------------------------------------------------------


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] ACCEPT_KEYWORDS + bootstrap.sh

[Jon Portnoy]

On Sun, Mar 16, 2003 at 10:22:26AM +0100, Per Wigren wrote:
> Hi!
> 
> I'm a Gentoo user since about 2 years... I just installed 1.4rc3 on another 
> computer and noticed this bug (?)..
> 
> During the installation I set ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~x86" in /etc/make.conf, but 
> when running bootstrap.sh it gets ignored.. So when running "emerge system" 
> afterwards it has to rebuild both gcc and glibc AGAIN, which took about 10 
> extra hours for those two packages alone on the old P2/266 i was installing 
> on... Quite annoying...  I hope this gets fixed before 1.4final ;)
> 
> Regards,
> Per Wigren
> 
> --
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

This is not a bug, this is a feature. :-)

In all seriousness, bootstrap.sh uses very specific settings for package 
versions. These are hardcoded in /usr/portage/profiles/<your profile 
version>/packages. You can change these manually before running 
bootstrap if you want. make.conf isn't used for bootstrap (it's actually 
moved to make.conf.build during bootstrap and moved back afterwards).

This is done for stability reasons - the versions used are known-good 
versions.

-- 
Jon Portnoy

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] ACCEPT_KEYWORDS + bootstrap.sh

[Felipe Ghellar]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed, Size: 786 bytes --]

Jon Portnoy wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 16, 2003 at 10:22:26AM +0100, Per Wigren wrote:
> 
>>During the installation I set ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~x86" in /etc/make.conf, but 
>>when running bootstrap.sh it gets ignored..
> 
> 
> This is not a bug, this is a feature. :-)
> 


Ignoring the user settings is not a feature, it's a bug. Especially in a 
meta-distribution, where the system should be built just the way the 
_user_ wants it (in contrast with the way the _developers_ want it).

http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11374

Felipe Ghellar


-- 


_______________________________________________________________________
Busca Yahoo!
O serviço de busca mais completo da Internet. O que você pensar o Yahoo! encontra.
http://br.busca.yahoo.com/

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] ACCEPT_KEYWORDS + bootstrap.sh

[Jon Portnoy]

On Sun, Mar 16, 2003 at 04:03:01PM -0300, Felipe Ghellar wrote:
> Jon Portnoy wrote:
> >On Sun, Mar 16, 2003 at 10:22:26AM +0100, Per Wigren wrote:
> >
> >>During the installation I set ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~x86" in /etc/make.conf, 
> >>but when running bootstrap.sh it gets ignored..
> >
> >
> >This is not a bug, this is a feature. :-)
> >
> 
> 
> Ignoring the user settings is not a feature, it's a bug. Especially in a 
> meta-distribution, where the system should be built just the way the 
> _user_ wants it (in contrast with the way the _developers_ want it).
> 
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11374
> 
> Felipe Ghellar
> 
> 
> -- 
> 

It doesn't ignore what the user wants. It just doesn't look where you 
think it should.

If someone really wants to use newer packages to bootstrap, they can 
edit the packages file in their profile. Otherwise things can 
potentially break and we get more bug reports.

I actually believe that the package versions in the profile should 
probably be upped because it's somewhat outdated. However, if you want 
to tune your settings for bootstrap, do it in places other than 
make.conf and don't file bug reports if something breaks in the process.

Users can do anything they want in make.conf after bootstapping.

If someone has a special need to use newer packages during bootstrap, 
they can edit profiles/<profile>/packages.

-- 
Jon Portnoy

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] ACCEPT_KEYWORDS + bootstrap.sh

[Felipe Ghellar]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed, Size: 1498 bytes --]

> It doesn't ignore what the user wants. It just doesn't look where you 
> think it should.

I don't see the difference...


> If someone really wants to use newer packages to bootstrap, they can 
> edit the packages file in their profile. Otherwise things can 
> potentially break and we get more bug reports.

Of course things can break. Even "stable" packages break sometimes. And 
of course there will be bug reports. Ain't that an important (and 
desired) part of the Gentoo development process? To know what does and 
what does not work together? And find out the reason when they don't?


> if you want 
> to tune your settings for bootstrap, do it in places other than 
> make.conf and don't file bug reports if something breaks in the process.
> 
> Users can do anything they want in make.conf after bootstapping.

In <http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/gentoo-x86-install.xml>, step 11 is 
where I set up my make.conf, and step 12 is where bootstraping takes 
place. I see no reason for step 12 to ignore what was set up in step 11.


Also, please read comment #3 in the bug report I cited earlier:
http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11374#c3
It contains many of the reasons why I believe make.conf should _never_ 
be ignored.


Felipe Ghellar

-- 


_______________________________________________________________________
Busca Yahoo!
O serviço de busca mais completo da Internet. O que você pensar o Yahoo! encontra.
http://br.busca.yahoo.com/

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] ACCEPT_KEYWORDS + bootstrap.sh

[George Shapovalov]

I agree with the reasoning behind this (meaning I think this is a right way to 
do it). 
However IMHO in order to stop complaint from both sides, this should probably 
be documented. Just a note in isntall instructions should suffice..
(There are some related notes at the moment, but not exactly about that. And 
yes, it is quite apperent from the script itself, but how many people 
actually read it?)

George


On Sunday 16 March 2003 11:08, Jon Portnoy wrote:
> On Sun, Mar 16, 2003 at 04:03:01PM -0300, Felipe Ghellar wrote:
> > Jon Portnoy wrote:
> > >On Sun, Mar 16, 2003 at 10:22:26AM +0100, Per Wigren wrote:
> > >>During the installation I set ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~x86" in /etc/make.conf,
> > >>but when running bootstrap.sh it gets ignored..
> > >
> > >This is not a bug, this is a feature. :-)
> >
> > Ignoring the user settings is not a feature, it's a bug. Especially in a
> > meta-distribution, where the system should be built just the way the
> > _user_ wants it (in contrast with the way the _developers_ want it).
> >
> > http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11374
> >
> > Felipe Ghellar
> >
> >
> > --
>
> It doesn't ignore what the user wants. It just doesn't look where you
> think it should.
>
> If someone really wants to use newer packages to bootstrap, they can
> edit the packages file in their profile. Otherwise things can
> potentially break and we get more bug reports.
>
> I actually believe that the package versions in the profile should
> probably be upped because it's somewhat outdated. However, if you want
> to tune your settings for bootstrap, do it in places other than
> make.conf and don't file bug reports if something breaks in the process.
>
> Users can do anything they want in make.conf after bootstapping.
>
> If someone has a special need to use newer packages during bootstrap,
> they can edit profiles/<profile>/packages.


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] ACCEPT_KEYWORDS + bootstrap.sh

[Nicholas Hockey]

[-- Attachment #1.1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1719 bytes --]

well there is a reason that the base system is set up a certain way,
it's so that when you do run the bootstrap it will compile, in Linux
there is no real "base system" as there is in freebsd, so the only
logical way around this is to build a good foundation, which is well
known to build a complete system, at the sacrifice of time.

or they could do it your way, by the way i have some cheap land in
Florida, right next to the river, i'll sell it to you, by your standards
it should be a great place to build a house

(sorry if this sounds rude i just thought this would be a good
comparison)

On Sun, 2003-03-16 at 14:03, Felipe Ghellar wrote:

> Jon Portnoy wrote:
> > On Sun, Mar 16, 2003 at 10:22:26AM +0100, Per Wigren wrote:
> > 
> >>During the installation I set ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~x86" in /etc/make.conf, but 
> >>when running bootstrap.sh it gets ignored..
> > 
> > 
> > This is not a bug, this is a feature. :-)
> > 
> 
> 
> Ignoring the user settings is not a feature, it's a bug. Especially in a 
> meta-distribution, where the system should be built just the way the 
> _user_ wants it (in contrast with the way the _developers_ want it).
> 
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=11374
> 
> Felipe Ghellar

-- 
Nicholas Hockey (Tilt) <tilt@bluecherry.net>
Unix Administrator
Encrypted E-Mail is preferred..
-------------------------------------------------------------------- 
GnuPG KeyID 4EDE2B84
Key fingerprint = B916 6032 BE3D 490D 2A08  F1BC 948A A4C1 4EDE 2B84
HKP: gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 4EDE2B84
LDAP: gpg --keyserver ldap://keyserver.pgp.com --recv-keys 4EDE2B84
--------------------------------------------------------------------

[-- Attachment #1.2: Type: text/html, Size: 2317 bytes --]

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

Re: [gentoo-dev] ACCEPT_KEYWORDS + bootstrap.sh

[Felipe Ghellar]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed, Size: 1495 bytes --]

Nicholas Hockey wrote:
> well there is a reason that the base system is set up a certain way, 
> it's so that when you do run the bootstrap it will compile, in Linux 
> there is no real "base system" as there is in freebsd, so the only 
> logical way around this is to build a good foundation, which is well 
> known to build a complete system, at the sacrifice of time.

Ok, let's simulate the installation process...

1) I preapare everything according to the Install Guide
2) I set up my make.conf the way I want it, with ~x86
3) I run bootstrap.sh; it ignores my "unstable" choice and builds a 
"stable" base system
4) I run emerge system and then complete the installation
5) later, I run emerge --sync and emerge -u --deep system; it now 
follows my "unstable" choice and brings in all those packages 
bootstrap.sh ignored

The net result is just that "sacrifice of time" you mentioned...


> or they could do it your way, by the way i have some cheap land in 
> Florida, right next to the river, i'll sell it to you, by your standards 
> it should be a great place to build a house
> 
> (sorry if this sounds rude i just thought this would be a good comparison)

Sorry, I don't get your point... (and I did't take it as rude)

Felipe Ghellar

-- 


_______________________________________________________________________
Busca Yahoo!
O serviço de busca mais completo da Internet. O que você pensar o Yahoo! encontra.
http://br.busca.yahoo.com/

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] ACCEPT_KEYWORDS + bootstrap.sh

[Nicholas Hockey]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1942 bytes --]

if your by a river in florida chances yer in a swamp, or near a sink
hole, not a good place to lay the foundation of your house

On Sun, 2003-03-16 at 14:49, Felipe Ghellar wrote:

> Nicholas Hockey wrote:
> > well there is a reason that the base system is set up a certain way, 
> > it's so that when you do run the bootstrap it will compile, in Linux 
> > there is no real "base system" as there is in freebsd, so the only 
> > logical way around this is to build a good foundation, which is well 
> > known to build a complete system, at the sacrifice of time.
> 
> Ok, let's simulate the installation process...
> 
> 1) I preapare everything according to the Install Guide
> 2) I set up my make.conf the way I want it, with ~x86
> 3) I run bootstrap.sh; it ignores my "unstable" choice and builds a 
> "stable" base system
> 4) I run emerge system and then complete the installation
> 5) later, I run emerge --sync and emerge -u --deep system; it now 
> follows my "unstable" choice and brings in all those packages 
> bootstrap.sh ignored
> 
> The net result is just that "sacrifice of time" you mentioned...
> 
> 
> > or they could do it your way, by the way i have some cheap land in 
> > Florida, right next to the river, i'll sell it to you, by your standards 
> > it should be a great place to build a house
> > 
> > (sorry if this sounds rude i just thought this would be a good comparison)
> 
> Sorry, I don't get your point... (and I did't take it as rude)
> 
> Felipe Ghellar

-- 
Nicholas Hockey (Tilt) <tilt@bluecherry.net>
Unix Administrator
Encrypted E-Mail is preferred..
-------------------------------------------------------------------- 
GnuPG KeyID 4EDE2B84
Key fingerprint = B916 6032 BE3D 490D 2A08  F1BC 948A A4C1 4EDE 2B84
HKP: gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 4EDE2B84
LDAP: gpg --keyserver ldap://keyserver.pgp.com --recv-keys 4EDE2B84
--------------------------------------------------------------------

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2402 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-dev] ACCEPT_KEYWORDS + bootstrap.sh

[Robert Cole]

I kind of agree with both points here. :) Let me explain...

If the RCx releases would use updated packages that are in the stable tree 
(ie. glibc 2.3.1, gcc 3.2.2, etc) I think people like Per, Nicholas, and 
myself would be a bit happier building and testing older systems. :)

If they are in the stable tree why not? Could this be done in the rc4 release?

Another keyword like BUILD_ACCEPT_KEYWORDS = x86 would probably satisfy those 
with the urge to be super on edge :) and could probably be done with min. 
effort in changes to the scripts to look for another keyword. Yes? No? maybe? 
Should I add it to the "bug" report?

Robert


On Sunday 16 March 2003 12:00 pm, Nicholas Hockey wrote:
> if your by a river in florida chances yer in a swamp, or near a sink
> hole, not a good place to lay the foundation of your house
>
> On Sun, 2003-03-16 at 14:49, Felipe Ghellar wrote:
> > Nicholas Hockey wrote:
> > > well there is a reason that the base system is set up a certain way,
> > > it's so that when you do run the bootstrap it will compile, in Linux
> > > there is no real "base system" as there is in freebsd, so the only
> > > logical way around this is to build a good foundation, which is well
> > > known to build a complete system, at the sacrifice of time.
> >
> > Ok, let's simulate the installation process...
> >
> > 1) I preapare everything according to the Install Guide
> > 2) I set up my make.conf the way I want it, with ~x86
> > 3) I run bootstrap.sh; it ignores my "unstable" choice and builds a
> > "stable" base system
> > 4) I run emerge system and then complete the installation
> > 5) later, I run emerge --sync and emerge -u --deep system; it now
> > follows my "unstable" choice and brings in all those packages
> > bootstrap.sh ignored
> >
> > The net result is just that "sacrifice of time" you mentioned...
> >
> > > or they could do it your way, by the way i have some cheap land in
> > > Florida, right next to the river, i'll sell it to you, by your
> > > standards it should be a great place to build a house
> > >
> > > (sorry if this sounds rude i just thought this would be a good
> > > comparison)
> >
> > Sorry, I don't get your point... (and I did't take it as rude)
> >
> > Felipe Ghellar


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] ACCEPT_KEYWORDS + bootstrap.sh

[George Shapovalov]

Hi Felipe.

On Sunday 16 March 2003 11:49, Felipe Ghellar wrote:
[skip]
> Ok, let's simulate the installation process...
>
> 1) I preapare everything according to the Install Guide
> 2) I set up my make.conf the way I want it, with ~x86
> 3) I run bootstrap.sh; it ignores my "unstable" choice and builds a
> "stable" base system
> 4) I run emerge system and then complete the installation
> 5) later, I run emerge --sync and emerge -u --deep system; it now
> follows my "unstable" choice and brings in all those packages
> bootstrap.sh ignored
The point is: bootstrap.sh buildlarge number of packets, gcc - twice and glibc 
once just to name the largest ones. If you get problems during bootstrap, you 
will have to identify it, correct your settings and rebootstrap.... Which  
potentially is a much larger waste of time. And by using "whatever pleases" 
at *this* point we are bringing the chances of failure to a noticeably high 
rate... Therefore I think the present way of enforcing stable profile is a 
right way to do it in general.
That said, I agree with your point that gentoo, being a meta-distribution, 
should allow its users to break itself as they wish ;). And the best way to 
accomodate this would be to add a short note (with appropriate disclaimer, 
like "we warned you, if you still insisted, please try to sort your screw-ups 
yourself...") to install instructions. Just a regular note in pp11 or 12 
should be fine - not too much noticeable/intrusive, but people looking for 
that kind of info will find it..

As for possible arguments, that the aove scenario is not such a waste of time, 
because you can modify bootstrap.sh to omit recompilations.. Well, if you are 
going to modify bootstrap.sh, you will notice what it does and will probably 
modify it so it picks up your wanted packges in the first place...

BTW, please feel free to add these comments to the bug you mentioned, so that 
somebody may consider modifying docs to suit the situation..

George

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] ACCEPT_KEYWORDS + bootstrap.sh

[Felipe Ghellar]

[-- Warning: decoded text below may be mangled, UTF-8 assumed --]
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed, Size: 1345 bytes --]

George Shapovalov wrote:
> That said, I agree with your point that gentoo, being a meta-distribution, 
> should allow its users to break itself as they wish ;). And the best way to 
> accomodate this would be to add a short note (with appropriate disclaimer, 
> like "we warned you, if you still insisted, please try to sort your screw-ups 
> yourself...") to install instructions. Just a regular note in pp11 or 12 
> should be fine - not too much noticeable/intrusive, but people looking for 
> that kind of info will find it..

This sounds like a good compromise to me. :)


> As for possible arguments, that the aove scenario is not such a waste of time, 
> because you can modify bootstrap.sh to omit recompilations.. Well, if you are 
> going to modify bootstrap.sh, you will notice what it does and will probably 
> modify it so it picks up your wanted packges in the first place...

Yes, I modified it as to not ignore my make.conf...


> BTW, please feel free to add these comments to the bug you mentioned, so that 
> somebody may consider modifying docs to suit the situation..

Ok. :)


-- 



_______________________________________________________________________
Busca Yahoo!
O serviço de busca mais completo da Internet. O que você pensar o Yahoo! encontra.
http://br.busca.yahoo.com/

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list