From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7D9B138010 for ; Thu, 11 Oct 2012 22:32:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 46E4421C037; Thu, 11 Oct 2012 22:31:52 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-oa0-f53.google.com (mail-oa0-f53.google.com [209.85.219.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7939D21C033 for ; Thu, 11 Oct 2012 22:31:25 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-oa0-f53.google.com with SMTP id j6so2382951oag.40 for ; Thu, 11 Oct 2012 15:31:24 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=EK8I7B9J0nAX3BxmArWNqdUM/yP3zXGEySevQAcpCuY=; b=zHFRqtDClpb2Ta14lpaboST6WtisvL1zUoWnQJk/4/PD5RsLgLLyj3eOe09/3L8KSI bjuiJeQ/Qwtl3DdQN5MF4a+uyvo27FLGDP5z19uHK2jw2w9ma8qOAdoMEmsXpvqx8S9q Bbl0emLfzfw2YHBln3bnVIjC3nrbshqPOJKmTYji2lXRqHUEHdEMctuJ2CJ2hIRycoFj kDdqJ1UipNntSStxdniW9DHoi1c7ilu7akEhVgsHNI4DLI/ccmf5F7ZLWdYONille1ax XK6kWYUesRaj8mwLKBT6jWq/E/VNQiTZzJYEHE2v9cPTbNAC2hN3tHiaFElcxaxPSt4j DF9Q== Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.60.32.137 with SMTP id j9mr2018715oei.133.1349994684850; Thu, 11 Oct 2012 15:31:24 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.60.3.37 with HTTP; Thu, 11 Oct 2012 15:31:24 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <507746A9.9020104@malth.us> References: <201210111522.17665.vapier@gentoo.org> <20121011200443.GA13679@waltdnes.org> <507746A9.9020104@malth.us> Date: Thu, 11 Oct 2012 17:31:24 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposal: removing "server" profile variants from profiles.desc From: Ben Kohler To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=e89a8fb1ec56a3a2eb04cbd0212c X-Archives-Salt: 59f3578b-1eae-4dd6-bc72-7f20ed3a8799 X-Archives-Hash: bea05675c86a90e8a964b68270ecf340 --e89a8fb1ec56a3a2eb04cbd0212c Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 There are other ways to achieve a "lighter" system, but that's not really what this is about. The server profiles are not any lighter than the base profiles. To those in favor of keeping some kind of "server" profile around, how would it differ from the base profile? What would you enable or disable on top of the base? I am pretty sure that the current USE="-perl -python snmp truetype xml" is not what any of you would suggest. In my opinion, removing /usr/portage/profiles/targets/server/make.defaults and having the "server" target apply nothing over the base profiles, and then dropping the warning from the server profiles, would be a better situation than where we are now. -Ben On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 5:22 PM, Gregory M. Turner wrote: > On 10/11/2012 1:04 PM, Walter Dnes wrote: > >> On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 03:22:17PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote >> >> sounds like something to fix rather than punt. i don't know why >>> you think having server profiles is "undesirable", but i certainly >>> desire it on many systems. like servers. the desktop and developer >>> profiles are not appropriate. >>> >> >> If you want a light >> profile, I suggest doing what I do... start your USE variable in >> make.conf with "-*", and add any flags you need, either in package.use or >> in make.conf. >> > > > > -gmt > > > --e89a8fb1ec56a3a2eb04cbd0212c Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable There are other ways to achieve a "lighter" system, but that'= s not really what this is about. =A0The server profiles are not any lighter= than the base profiles.=A0

To those in favor of keeping= some kind of "server" profile around, how would it differ from t= he base profile? =A0What would you enable or disable on top of the base? = =A0I am pretty sure that the current=A0USE=3D"-perl -python snmp truet= ype xml" is not what any of you would suggest.

In my opinion, removing /usr/portage/profiles/targets/s= erver/make.defaults and having the "server" target apply nothing = over the base profiles, and then dropping the warning from the server profi= les, would be a better situation than where we are now.

-Ben


On Th= u, Oct 11, 2012 at 5:22 PM, Gregory M. Turner <gmt@malth.us> wrot= e:
On 10/11/2012 1:04 PM, Walter Dnes wrote:
On Thu, Oct 11, 2012 at 03:22:17PM -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote

sounds like something to fix rather than punt. =A0i don't know why
you think having server profiles is "undesirable", but i certainl= y
desire it on many systems. =A0like servers. =A0the desktop and developer profiles are not appropriate.

If you want a light
profile, I suggest doing what I do... start your USE variable in
make.conf with "-*", and add any flags you need, either in packag= e.use or
in make.conf.

<popcorn>

-gmt



--e89a8fb1ec56a3a2eb04cbd0212c--