[gentoo-server] new 2006.1/server profile

[gentoo-server] new 2006.1/server profile

[David CHANIAL]

Hi,

I'm happy to discover a server profile on the new gentoo 2006.1.

It seems to not be considered as stable.

as i maintain lot of machines, i'm ready to give you back somes informations 
or results of tests.

So what do you wait during the test period in order to move it as stable in 
2006.2 (for example).

Best regards,
-- 
David CHANIAL - Euro Web SARL - http://www.euro-web.fr
  Location de serveurs dédiés infogérés
  Infogérance et consulting
  Hébergement mutualisé sur mesure
  Serveurs de jeux

-- 
gentoo-server@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-server] new 2006.1/server profile

[Donatas]

I'm using 2006.1/server profile, no problem for now.

David CHANIAL wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I'm happy to discover a server profile on the new gentoo 2006.1.
> 
> It seems to not be considered as stable.
> 
> as i maintain lot of machines, i'm ready to give you back somes informations 
> or results of tests.
> 
> So what do you wait during the test period in order to move it as stable in 
> 2006.2 (for example).
> 
> Best regards,
-- 
gentoo-server@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-server] new 2006.1/server profile

[Andrew Gaffney]

David CHANIAL wrote:
> I'm happy to discover a server profile on the new gentoo 2006.1.
> 
> It seems to not be considered as stable.
> 
> as i maintain lot of machines, i'm ready to give you back somes informations 
> or results of tests.
> 
> So what do you wait during the test period in order to move it as stable in 
> 2006.2 (for example).

A lot of people seem to think that the x86/2006.1/server profile is more than it 
actually is. This profile is absolutely no different than the x86/2006.0 and 
x86/2006.1/desktop profiles, except for different USE. That's it. The only 
difference.

-- 
Andrew Gaffney                            http://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/
Gentoo Linux Developer                                   Installer Project
-- 
gentoo-server@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-server] new 2006.1/server profile

[Gentoo]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1029 bytes --]

how to install a gentoo "server" more quickly?
I tried GUI install, does not work, always die at cannot emerge ssmtp

On 9/13/06, Andrew Gaffney <agaffney@gentoo.org> wrote:
>
> David CHANIAL wrote:
> > I'm happy to discover a server profile on the new gentoo 2006.1.
> >
> > It seems to not be considered as stable.
> >
> > as i maintain lot of machines, i'm ready to give you back somes
> informations
> > or results of tests.
> >
> > So what do you wait during the test period in order to move it as stable
> in
> > 2006.2 (for example).
>
> A lot of people seem to think that the x86/2006.1/server profile is more
> than it
> actually is. This profile is absolutely no different than the x86/2006.0
> and
> x86/2006.1/desktop profiles, except for different USE. That's it. The only
> difference.
>
> --
> Andrew Gaffney                            http://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/
> Gentoo Linux Developer                                   Installer Project
> --
> gentoo-server@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>


-- 
Life is hard

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 1786 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-server] new 2006.1/server profile

[kashani]

Andrew Gaffney wrote:
> A lot of people seem to think that the x86/2006.1/server profile is more 
> than it actually is. This profile is absolutely no different than the 
> x86/2006.0 and x86/2006.1/desktop profiles, except for different USE. 
> That's it. The only difference.
> 

	I agree with you. Other then turning on ldap globally, which annoyed 
me, I saw no difference from straight 2006.1 at least with my normal USE 
flags.

kashani
-- 
gentoo-server@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-server] new 2006.1/server profile

[Andrew Gaffney]

kashani wrote:
> Andrew Gaffney wrote:
>> A lot of people seem to think that the x86/2006.1/server profile is 
>> more than it actually is. This profile is absolutely no different than 
>> the x86/2006.0 and x86/2006.1/desktop profiles, except for different 
>> USE. That's it. The only difference.
> 
>     I agree with you. Other then turning on ldap globally, which annoyed 
> me, I saw no difference from straight 2006.1 at least with my normal USE 
> flags.

Is your USE="-ldap" broken? :P You can't satisfy everyone. The profile does 
nothing more than give people a more server-oriented set of default USE.

-- 
Andrew Gaffney                            http://dev.gentoo.org/~agaffney/
Gentoo Linux Developer                                   Installer Project

-- 
gentoo-server@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-server] new 2006.1/server profile

[kashani]

Andrew Gaffney wrote:
> kashani wrote:
>>     I agree with you. Other then turning on ldap globally, which 
>> annoyed me, I saw no difference from straight 2006.1 at least with my 
>> normal USE flags.
> 
> Is your USE="-ldap" broken? :P You can't satisfy everyone. The profile 
> does nothing more than give people a more server-oriented set of default 
> USE.
> 

	Heh. In my mind this is reason we haven't seen much progress on the 
server front. Some people imagine a server profile to be the minimum USE 
flags needed to have a working system to which they can add their own 
flags. Others want something that has made some decisions for them or at 
least a recommended set of flags that will enable server functionality.
	Apparently I'm in that first category or I've just been doing it too 
long since I already have -java -arts -alsa -oss -X -gtk -qt etc in my 
/etc/make.conf. I probably can drop those in exchange for adding -ldap 
which is probably something a guy building a server on Gentoo for the 
first time would appreciate.

kashani
-- 
gentoo-server@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-server] new 2006.1/server profile

[Jonas Fietz]

kashani wrote:
> Andrew Gaffney wrote:
>> kashani wrote:
>>>     I agree with you. Other then turning on ldap globally, which 
>>> annoyed me, I saw no difference from straight 2006.1 at least with my 
>>> normal USE flags.
>>
>> Is your USE="-ldap" broken? :P You can't satisfy everyone. The profile 
>> does nothing more than give people a more server-oriented set of 
>> default USE.
>>
> 
>     Heh. In my mind this is reason we haven't seen much progress on the 
> server front. Some people imagine a server profile to be the minimum USE 
> flags needed to have a working system to which they can add their own 
> flags. Others want something that has made some decisions for them or at 
> least a recommended set of flags that will enable server functionality.
>     Apparently I'm in that first category or I've just been doing it too 
Well, lowest common denominator would be an idea. On servers, I always 
do -* anyway, so profiles that change a few use-flags don't really 
matter at all to me anyway.
I also see the point that this is not that doable, as there are probably 
quite a few who do not use pam at all (which I on the other hand do).
But why would, by default, X be activated? (Also a few others, but I 
think that X is the best example of "too much")

Greetings,

Jonas
-- 
gentoo-server@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-server] new 2006.1/server profile

[Jonathan Nichols]

>>     Apparently I'm in that first category or I've just been doing it too 
> Well, lowest common denominator would be an idea. On servers, I always 
> do -* anyway, so profiles that change a few use-flags don't really 

Same here. So before I go and use that new profile, what exactly should 
I be aware of? It changes my make.conf and adds new USE settings? That's 
it?

-- 
gentoo-server@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-server] new 2006.1/server profile

[Donatas]

You should use what ever you need. Server2006 prfile is a minimum use 
flasgs based profile.

USE="apache2 ldap mailwrapper mysql snmp truetype xml"

Desktop use:

USE="alsa arts cairo cdr dbus dvd dvdr eds emboss encode esd fam firefox 
gif gn$


See the difference?

Jonathan Nichols wrote:
> 
>>>     Apparently I'm in that first category or I've just been doing it too 
>> Well, lowest common denominator would be an idea. On servers, I always 
>> do -* anyway, so profiles that change a few use-flags don't really 
> 
> Same here. So before I go and use that new profile, what exactly should 
> I be aware of? It changes my make.conf and adds new USE settings? That's 
> it?
> 
-- 
gentoo-server@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-server] new 2006.1/server profile

[rdmurray]

On Sat, 16 Sep 2006 at 08:52, Jonathan Nichols wrote:
>> >      Apparently I'm in that first category or I've just been doing it too
>>  Well, lowest common denominator would be an idea. On servers, I always do
>>  -* anyway, so profiles that change a few use-flags don't really 
>
> Same here. So before I go and use that new profile, what exactly should I be 
> aware of? It changes my make.conf and adds new USE settings? That's it?

Well, it doesn't _change_ make.conf, it just has a different list of
default USE flags than the desktop profile does (a much smaller one).

Be aware also that emerge is going to warn you on every build that it is an
unsupported profile.  It's probably less annoying to stick with -* :)

--David
-- 
gentoo-server@gentoo.org mailing list