[gentoo-user] Most important packages to save buildpkg of

[gentoo-user] Most important packages to save buildpkg of

[Dale]

Hi,

Every once in a blue moon I screw up something.  I don't know why I am
telling you this.  I come here mostly for help.  LOL  So you already now
that.  I have buildpkg set in make.conf.  It does tend to consume some
space though.  What is say the top ten or twelve programs that would be
good to have in case of a rescue?  I would assume portage, gcc and
python would be pretty important.  I plan to delete the rest for space.

Since I figure some of you have more experience, I thought I would ask
you folks.  What is really needed to rescue from a serious borking of a
Gentoo install?

Also, what commands would a person have to use to make use of those
buildpkg's?  So far, I have not needed one.  < says prayer >  That
assumes portage is what is screwed up to begin with. 

Thanks

Dale

:-)  :-)  :-)

-- 
www.myspace.com/dalek1967

-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Most important packages to save buildpkg of

[Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1909 bytes --]

On Sunday 21 January 2007 09:55, Dale <dalek@exceedtech.net> wrote 
about '[gentoo-user] Most important packages to save buildpkg of':
> Every once in a blue moon I screw up something.  I don't know why I am
> telling you this.  I come here mostly for help.  LOL  So you already now
> that.  I have buildpkg set in make.conf.  It does tend to consume some
> space though.  What is say the top ten or twelve programs that would be
> good to have in case of a rescue?  I would assume portage, gcc and
> python would be pretty important.  I plan to delete the rest for space.

Keep a glibc and binutils around as well.  Have busybox *installed*, 
statically linked.  pam, acl and your favorite non-X11 editor would be my 
next additions to the package list. Then, to round out the 10-12 add all 
the packages that provide your file system (e2fstools, reiserfstools, 
etc.) and block device (LVM, EVMS, etc.) tools.

> Also, what commands would a person have to use to make use of those
> buildpkg's?  So far, I have not needed one.  < says prayer >  That
> assumes portage is what is screwed up to begin with.

All you need is tar.  You simply extract the compressed tarball over your 
root file system and the package is installed, but not entered into the 
vdb (so, it wouldn't be a bad idea to re-emerge it once you get portage 
back up).

If you glibc gets screwed up, your standard tar will probably just die on 
you, which is why I mentioned a statically linked busybox as something to 
install. Busybox can  function as both a shell (if bash starts misbehaving 
cause readline, glibc, or something else it links to is broken) and tar, 
as well as a host of other programs.

-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.             ,= ,-_-. =. 
bss03@volumehost.net              ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy   `-'(. .)`-' 
http://iguanasuicide.org/              \_/     

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Most important packages to save buildpkg of

[Bo Ørsted Andresen]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1126 bytes --]

On Sunday 21 January 2007 16:55, Dale wrote:
[SNIP]
> I have buildpkg set in make.conf.  It does tend to consume some
> space though.

You are aware that you can use eclean from app-portage/gentoolkit to clean 
binpkgs that you no longer have installed? I tend to use it with 
the --destructive option.

> What is say the top ten or twelve programs that would be 
> good to have in case of a rescue?  I would assume portage, gcc and
> python would be pretty important.  I plan to delete the rest for space.

I'd add bash and baselayout too (in addition to Boyds suggestions).

[SNIP]
> Also, what commands would a person have to use to make use of those
> buildpkg's?  So far, I have not needed one.  < says prayer >  That
> assumes portage is what is screwed up to begin with.

# cd /
# tar -xjf ${PATH_TO_BINPKG}.tbz2

When portage is working:

# emerge -K ${PKG}

Also if you cannot boot and you have busybox installed, statically linked 
adding "init=/bin/busybox" to the boot line should allow you to use busybox 
to extract the tarballs. Otherwise a livecd should work.

-- 
Bo Andresen

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Most important packages to save buildpkg of

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1250 bytes --]

On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 14:25:21 -0600, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:

> > Also, what commands would a person have to use to make use of those
> > buildpkg's?  So far, I have not needed one.  < says prayer >  That
> > assumes portage is what is screwed up to begin with.  
> 
> All you need is tar.  You simply extract the compressed tarball over
> your root file system and the package is installed, but not entered
> into the vdb (so, it wouldn't be a bad idea to re-emerge it once you
> get portage back up).

Remember that tar doesn't respect $CONFIG_PROTECT, so it may overwrite
your carefully crafted configuration files in /etc. Og course, if you're
sensible enough to keep binary packages of the most important apps
around, you're more than sensible enough to have a backup of /etc :)

You may also want to consider keeping binary packages of some of the
larger (as i compile time) not-quite-essential packages. Keeping binaries
of xorg-server, kdelibs etc. may help you get going again more quickly
after a broken upgrade or other borkage. If you use openoffice, as
opposed to openoffice-bin, keeping a package fo that goes without saying.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

If at first you don't succeed, skydiving is not for you.

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Most important packages to save buildpkg of

[Dale]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2183 bytes --]

Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> On Sunday 21 January 2007 09:55, Dale <dalek@exceedtech.net> wrote 
> about '[gentoo-user] Most important packages to save buildpkg of':
>   
>> Every once in a blue moon I screw up something.  I don't know why I am
>> telling you this.  I come here mostly for help.  LOL  So you already now
>> that.  I have buildpkg set in make.conf.  It does tend to consume some
>> space though.  What is say the top ten or twelve programs that would be
>> good to have in case of a rescue?  I would assume portage, gcc and
>> python would be pretty important.  I plan to delete the rest for space.
>>     
>
> Keep a glibc and binutils around as well.  Have busybox *installed*, 
> statically linked.  pam, acl and your favorite non-X11 editor would be my 
> next additions to the package list. Then, to round out the 10-12 add all 
> the packages that provide your file system (e2fstools, reiserfstools, 
> etc.) and block device (LVM, EVMS, etc.) tools.
>   

I have busybox installed.  I wonder where that came from.  :/  This is
what it says the flags are:

> [ebuild   R   ] sys-apps/busybox-1.2.2.1  USE="-debug -make-symlinks
> -netboot -savedconfig -static" 1,380 kB

Those correct?  I would hate to bork something and then find out busybox
is installed wrong.  It would be my luck though.


>   
>> Also, what commands would a person have to use to make use of those
>> buildpkg's?  So far, I have not needed one.  < says prayer >  That
>> assumes portage is what is screwed up to begin with.
>>     
>
> All you need is tar.  You simply extract the compressed tarball over your 
> root file system and the package is installed, but not entered into the 
> vdb (so, it wouldn't be a bad idea to re-emerge it once you get portage 
> back up).
>
> If you glibc gets screwed up, your standard tar will probably just die on 
> you, which is why I mentioned a statically linked busybox as something to 
> install. Busybox can  function as both a shell (if bash starts misbehaving 
> cause readline, glibc, or something else it links to is broken) and tar, 
> as well as a host of other programs.
>
>   

Thanks

Dale

:-)  :-)

-- 
www.myspace.com/dalek1967


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 3089 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Most important packages to save buildpkg of

[Dale]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1458 bytes --]

Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Jan 2007 14:25:21 -0600, Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
>
>   
>>> Also, what commands would a person have to use to make use of those
>>> buildpkg's?  So far, I have not needed one.  < says prayer >  That
>>> assumes portage is what is screwed up to begin with.  
>>>       
>> All you need is tar.  You simply extract the compressed tarball over
>> your root file system and the package is installed, but not entered
>> into the vdb (so, it wouldn't be a bad idea to re-emerge it once you
>> get portage back up).
>>     
>
> Remember that tar doesn't respect $CONFIG_PROTECT, so it may overwrite
> your carefully crafted configuration files in /etc. Og course, if you're
> sensible enough to keep binary packages of the most important apps
> around, you're more than sensible enough to have a backup of /etc :)
>
> You may also want to consider keeping binary packages of some of the
> larger (as i compile time) not-quite-essential packages. Keeping binaries
> of xorg-server, kdelibs etc. may help you get going again more quickly
> after a broken upgrade or other borkage. If you use openoffice, as
> opposed to openoffice-bin, keeping a package fo that goes without saying.
>
>
>   

I do  make backups of /etc.  It's the only way to make sure.  I mean,
those are crucial.  I have used them once or twice.  That merge thing
sort of confuses me sometimes. 

Thanks

Dale

:-)  :-)  :-) 

-- 
www.myspace.com/dalek1967


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2126 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Most important packages to save buildpkg of

[Dale]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 2056 bytes --]

Bo Ørsted Andresen wrote:
> On Sunday 21 January 2007 16:55, Dale wrote:
> [SNIP]
>   
>> I have buildpkg set in make.conf.  It does tend to consume some
>> space though.
>>     
>
> You are aware that you can use eclean from app-portage/gentoolkit to clean 
> binpkgs that you no longer have installed? I tend to use it with 
> the --destructive option.
>   

Yea, I use that.  Some of my older systems have small drives though.  I
even delete everything from distfiles, sometimes I have too.  :-O
>   
>> What is say the top ten or twelve programs that would be 
>> good to have in case of a rescue?  I would assume portage, gcc and
>> python would be pretty important.  I plan to delete the rest for space.
>>     
>
> I'd add bash and baselayout too (in addition to Boyds suggestions).
>
> [SNIP]
>   
>> Also, what commands would a person have to use to make use of those
>> buildpkg's?  So far, I have not needed one.  < says prayer >  That
>> assumes portage is what is screwed up to begin with.
>>     
>
> # cd /
> # tar -xjf ${PATH_TO_BINPKG}.tbz2
>
> When portage is working:
>
> # emerge -K ${PKG}
>
> Also if you cannot boot and you have busybox installed, statically linked 
> adding "init=/bin/busybox" to the boot line should allow you to use busybox 
> to extract the tarballs. Otherwise a livecd should work.
>
>   

I made a note of those commands.  lol  Maybe now I won't need them.  ;-)

Here is the list so far:

portage, gcc, python, pam, acl, nano, reiserfstools, bash, baselayout.  
We can add in any big packages if we feel froggy, OOo, kdelibs etc etc. 
May help.  Funny though, I haven't had OOo fail to compile or not work
right in ages.  It just seems to work like it should.  Is that lucky or
what?

Anybody think of something else that should be added??  I wonder if I
should post this info on the forums?  This is something that would be
good to know really, especially of you are new to Gentoo.

Thanks

Dale

:-)  :-)  :-)

-- 
www.myspace.com/dalek1967


[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2912 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Most important packages to save buildpkg of

[Alan McKinnon]

On Sunday 21 January 2007 17:55, Dale wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Every once in a blue moon I screw up something.  I don't know why I
> am telling you this.  I come here mostly for help.  LOL  So you
> already now that.  I have buildpkg set in make.conf.  It does tend to
> consume some space though.  What is say the top ten or twelve
> programs that would be good to have in case of a rescue?  I would
> assume portage, gcc and python would be pretty important.  I plan to
> delete the rest for space.
>
> Since I figure some of you have more experience, I thought I would
> ask you folks.  What is really needed to rescue from a serious
> borking of a Gentoo install?

Everything in system - it all has to be there anyway 

Then anything else you consider that's a major pain to emerge - 
openoffice, koffice, kde and Xorg come to mind. This isn't necessary, 
just makes life more convenient if and when you need it

alan
-- 
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-user] Most important packages to save buildpkg of

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 669 bytes --]

On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 00:22:08 -0600, Dale wrote:

> > You are aware that you can use eclean from app-portage/gentoolkit to
> > clean binpkgs that you no longer have installed? I tend to use it
> > with the --destructive option.

> Yea, I use that.  Some of my older systems have small drives though.  I
> even delete everything from distfiles, sometimes I have too.  :-O

Are these networked? If so put $DISTDIR (and possibly $PKGDIR) on a
shared NFS filesystem. Sharing $DISTDIR makes a lot of sense, there's no
point in keeping a separate copy of the source for each machine.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Behaviorist psychology -- pulling habits out of rats

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] Most important packages to save buildpkg of

[Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1202 bytes --]

On Monday 22 January 2007 00:12, Dale <dalek@exceedtech.net> wrote 
about 'Re: [gentoo-user] Most important packages to save buildpkg of':
> Boyd Stephen Smith Jr. wrote:
> > On Sunday 21 January 2007 09:55, Dale <dalek@exceedtech.net> wrote
> >> What is say the top ten or twelve
> >> programs that would be good to have in case of a rescue?
> >
> > Have busybox *installed*,
> > statically linked.
>
> I have busybox installed.  I wonder where that came from.  :/  This is
>
> what it says the flags are:
> > [ebuild   R   ] sys-apps/busybox-1.2.2.1  USE="-debug -make-symlinks
> > -netboot -savedconfig -static" 1,380 kB

I'd go ahead and set that static flag; while it doesn't use the c++ 
libraries (the most common fsck-up with glibc), it does link to libc (and 
possibly others) dynamically, and it's nice to be able to recover even a 
screwed up ld-linux.so or libc.6.so.  You don't want it for all packages, 
so use /etc/portage/package.use to set it just for busybox.

-- 
Boyd Stephen Smith Jr.             ,= ,-_-. =. 
bss03@volumehost.net              ((_/)o o(\_))
ICQ: 514984 YM/AIM: DaTwinkDaddy   `-'(. .)`-' 
http://iguanasuicide.org/              \_/     

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]