* Fw: [gentoo-user] Whole lotta minimal
@ 2006-09-20 21:29 Jan-Hendrik Zab
2006-09-20 21:58 ` Grant
0 siblings, 1 reply; 4+ messages in thread
From: Jan-Hendrik Zab @ 2006-09-20 21:29 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-user
On Wed, 20 Sep 2006 10:54:57 -0700
Grant <emailgrant@gmail.com> wrote:
> Can someone explain the great minimal breakout happening in portage or
> point me toward a link? Is USE="minimal" in make.conf the kind of
> thing you should do if you don't have a specific reason not to, or the
> kind of thing you shouldn't do unless you have a specific reason to.
>
> - Grant
The second one, but I can't come up with any possible reason for doing
so. The actual problem is that the flag has no 'real' global meaning,
which means that it might turn off some 'unnecessary' features in one
application and turn off one of the most useful in another.
So don't gamble with it. :)
Jan-Hendrik Zab
--
| Jan-Hendrik Zab
| +49 (0)1773392888
| http://www.v3ng34nce.org
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: Fw: [gentoo-user] Whole lotta minimal
2006-09-20 21:29 Fw: [gentoo-user] Whole lotta minimal Jan-Hendrik Zab
@ 2006-09-20 21:58 ` Grant
2006-09-21 0:22 ` Ryan Tandy
2006-09-21 0:33 ` Harm Geerts
0 siblings, 2 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Grant @ 2006-09-20 21:58 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-user
> > Can someone explain the great minimal breakout happening in portage or
> > point me toward a link? Is USE="minimal" in make.conf the kind of
> > thing you should do if you don't have a specific reason not to, or the
> > kind of thing you shouldn't do unless you have a specific reason to.
> >
> > - Grant
> The second one, but I can't come up with any possible reason for doing
> so. The actual problem is that the flag has no 'real' global meaning,
> which means that it might turn off some 'unnecessary' features in one
> application and turn off one of the most useful in another.
>
> So don't gamble with it. :)
Ok, good to know. Can anyone report any packages they prefer to run
with USE="minimal" ?
- Grant
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: Fw: [gentoo-user] Whole lotta minimal
2006-09-20 21:58 ` Grant
@ 2006-09-21 0:22 ` Ryan Tandy
2006-09-21 0:33 ` Harm Geerts
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Ryan Tandy @ 2006-09-21 0:22 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-user
Grant wrote:
>> > Can someone explain the great minimal breakout happening in portage or
>> > point me toward a link? Is USE="minimal" in make.conf the kind of
>> > thing you should do if you don't have a specific reason not to, or the
>> > kind of thing you shouldn't do unless you have a specific reason to.
>> >
>> > - Grant
>> The second one, but I can't come up with any possible reason for doing
>> so. The actual problem is that the flag has no 'real' global meaning,
>> which means that it might turn off some 'unnecessary' features in one
>> application and turn off one of the most useful in another.
>>
>> So don't gamble with it. :)
>
> Ok, good to know. Can anyone report any packages they prefer to run
> with USE="minimal" ?
>
> - Grant
app-editors/vim: I already know how to use vim, so I don't need
vimtutor, and I can live without help files installed locally
net-misc/dhcp: I get my DHCP server from a different package, so no
point building dhcpd
sys-libs/ncurses: don't want a zillion obscure terminal types installed
in terminfo that I've never heard of
I wouldn't put minimal in make.conf - it's too easy to trip over.
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
* Re: Fw: [gentoo-user] Whole lotta minimal
2006-09-20 21:58 ` Grant
2006-09-21 0:22 ` Ryan Tandy
@ 2006-09-21 0:33 ` Harm Geerts
1 sibling, 0 replies; 4+ messages in thread
From: Harm Geerts @ 2006-09-21 0:33 UTC (permalink / raw
To: gentoo-user
On Wednesday 20 September 2006 23:58, Grant wrote:
> > > Can someone explain the great minimal breakout happening in portage or
> > > point me toward a link? Is USE="minimal" in make.conf the kind of
> > > thing you should do if you don't have a specific reason not to, or the
> > > kind of thing you shouldn't do unless you have a specific reason to.
> > >
> > > - Grant
> >
> > The second one, but I can't come up with any possible reason for doing
> > so. The actual problem is that the flag has no 'real' global meaning,
> > which means that it might turn off some 'unnecessary' features in one
> > application and turn off one of the most useful in another.
> >
> > So don't gamble with it. :)
>
> Ok, good to know. Can anyone report any packages they prefer to run
> with USE="minimal" ?
xorg-server on a headless system.
It allows you to install X dependent packages and run them remotely (over ssh)
without having to install the complete X server. (you can also disable
the "xorg" flag since you won't need any input/output drivers)
mysql on a client system.
This only installs the libraries that are needed for clients.
For instance if you need your apache/php webserver to talk to mysql but have
no need for a local mysqlserver.
--
gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 4+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2006-09-21 0:40 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2006-09-20 21:29 Fw: [gentoo-user] Whole lotta minimal Jan-Hendrik Zab
2006-09-20 21:58 ` Grant
2006-09-21 0:22 ` Ryan Tandy
2006-09-21 0:33 ` Harm Geerts
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox