* Re: [gentoo-dev] openrc 0.12 - netifrc/newnet mix-up
@ 2013-12-10 18:46 99% ` Steev Klimaszewski
0 siblings, 0 replies; 1+ results
From: Steev Klimaszewski @ 2013-12-10 18:46 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-dev
On Tue, 2013-12-10 at 06:23 -0500, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 10, 2013 at 5:31 AM, Steev Klimaszewski <steev@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > On Mon, 2013-12-09 at 20:33 -0500, Rich Freeman wrote:
> > You're thinking with your x86/amd64 hat on here.
>
> Actually, I probably just underquoted. I am well-aware that there are
> issues with ARM, hence my previous suggestion that it might make sense
> to vary this by profile.
>
Definitely - but then we have to do everything in the profiles, and at
least for ARM, there are currently 6 profiles, and we're considering
introducing a 7th (neon), and we will need to add aarch64, which will be
at least 2 more. I suppose we could do it in the base arm profile...
> Let me try my post again, with a bit more quoting:
>
> On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 2:56 PM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina
> <zerochaos@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > What if he wants to
> > put a stage3 on a disk for his amd64 box from his arm box? I'd love to
> > see him emulate an amd64 from his arm to install dhcpcd.
> ...
> > I really don't like the idea of having no networking in the stage3 by
> > default, however, I'm becoming more open minded on what qualifies as
> > networking. What I'm wrestling with is this, what if I want to slap a
> > stage3 on a device and then access it from the network?
> > Almost nothing
> > in my place has a monitor (amd64 and arm alike) and I use one of my two
> > laptops to talk to everything else.
>
> Hit your head on the wall because it doesn't contain a kernel?
> Stage3s in general aren't functional systems.
>
> Insofar as much as he was talking about ARM I get the point. Insofar
> as he is taking about amd64, not so much. Which he was talking about
> in that paragraph I can only guess at.
>
> But as I later said in the same email:
>
> If it actually had collisions with other network managers I think
> there would be more of a case for removing it.
>
> After all, we stick openrc and portage (the PM) in the stage3 and you
> don't exactly need those in order to run Gentoo...
>
> Rich
>
While you don't need those specifically to run Gentoo, the point of the
stage3 is to have a workable base to start with. So people are very
much free to yank out openrc and put in, say, systemd, and rip out
portage and add in paludis, if they so choose, and make those available.
And from the traffic I've seen on the systemd list, it looks like they
are adding some sort of networking to systemd itself as well, so we
probably will need a virtual at some point. My specific point of the
email though, was you saying that a stage3 in general aren't functional
- but they are - they are the very base of a functional system, and you
simply add things on top, or replace things with your preferred methods.
A stage1 or a stage2 isn't particularly functional.
^ permalink raw reply [relevance 99%]
Results 1-1 of 1 | reverse | options above
-- pct% links below jump to the message on this page, permalinks otherwise --
2013-12-01 10:20 [gentoo-dev] openrc 0.12 - netifrc/newnet mix-up Alessandro DE LAURENZIS
2013-12-02 20:28 ` William Hubbs
2013-12-02 21:19 ` Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina
2013-12-02 21:24 ` Ian Stakenvicius
2013-12-03 17:32 ` Alexander V Vershilov
2013-12-03 21:11 ` William Hubbs
2013-12-07 5:52 ` Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina
2013-12-08 22:25 ` William Hubbs
2013-12-09 14:50 ` Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina
2013-12-09 15:28 ` Rich Freeman
2013-12-09 19:56 ` Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina
2013-12-10 1:33 ` Rich Freeman
2013-12-10 10:31 ` Steev Klimaszewski
2013-12-10 11:23 ` Rich Freeman
2013-12-10 18:46 99% ` Steev Klimaszewski
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox