[gentoo-user] upgrading from kernel 2.6.24-rc6 to latest kernel

[gentoo-user] upgrading from kernel 2.6.24-rc6 to latest kernel

[bn]

Hi,

My Gentoo laptop is a Macbook Pro SantaRosa (late 2007, probably
MA896LL/A , following wikipedia). Since I use it for work I've always
been quite conservative with it... it is an x86 machine and I upgrade
things only after having read things here and there on the ML and
possibly elsewhere (Still have to upgrade xorg, for example, will do it
soon).

The oldest piece I haven't touched is the kernel. It is 2.6.24-rc6
vanilla-sources, which were the first mostly working with the laptop...
and never touched since.

Now I want to ask the list:
1) Does anyone have a recent kernel config for this kind of machine?
2) What are the caveats and pitfalls I should be aware of when upgrading
to latest kernel? I confess that reading CHANGELOGs didn't help me too
much, quite confusing.

Also, I wonder if portage's madwifi now supports the Macbook Pro
chipset... I had to use SVN one at the time.

thanks,
m.

RE: [gentoo-user] upgrading from kernel 2.6.24-rc6 to latest kernel

[Adam Carter]

> My Gentoo laptop is a Macbook Pro SantaRosa (late 2007, probably
> MA896LL/A , following wikipedia). Since I use it for work I've always
> been quite conservative with it... it is an x86 machine and I upgrade
> things only after having read things here and there on the ML and
> possibly elsewhere (Still have to upgrade xorg, for example,
> will do it
> soon).
>
> The oldest piece I haven't touched is the kernel. It is 2.6.24-rc6
> vanilla-sources, which were the first mostly working with the
> laptop... and never touched since.
>
> Now I want to ask the list:
> 1) Does anyone have a recent kernel config for this kind of machine?

Just copy your .config file to the new kernel source directory and run "make oldconfig". This runs through the old config file and prompts you to select what you want for the new options.

> 2) What are the caveats and pitfalls I should be aware of
> when upgrading to latest kernel? I confess that reading CHANGELOGs didn't help me too
> much, quite confusing.

You can keep both kernels and just use the bootloader to select which one to boot into. So if your new kernel doesn't work just reboot and use your old kernel again until you can work out whats wrong with the new one.

The biggest risk is that there are two ATA options one names disks sdX the other hdX. If you're already using sdX in your /etc/fstab then you have no problems. If not, and you change options you'll need to change your bootloader and fstab, and if you have a problem you'll have to boot from cdrom to fix that.

> Also, I wonder if portage's madwifi now supports the Macbook Pro
> chipset... I had to use SVN one at the time.

The drivers might be in the kernel now. I was using madwifi-ng and changed to the ath5k driver at around 2.6.26 or 27.

Re: [gentoo-user] upgrading from kernel 2.6.24-rc6 to latest kernel

[bn]

Adam Carter ha scritto:
>> Now I want to ask the list:
>> 1) Does anyone have a recent kernel config for this kind of machine?
> 
> Just copy your .config file to the new kernel source directory and run "make oldconfig". This runs through the old config file and prompts you to select what you want for the new options.

*slaps on head*
yeah.

>> 2) What are the caveats and pitfalls I should be aware of
>> when upgrading to latest kernel? I confess that reading CHANGELOGs didn't help me too
>> much, quite confusing.
> 
> You can keep both kernels and just use the bootloader to select which one to boot into. So if your new kernel doesn't work just reboot and use your old kernel again until you can work out whats wrong with the new one.

Yes, but this means recompiling all external modules (nvidia, madwifi)
every time I boot in a new kernel if I want them to work, isn't it?


>> Also, I wonder if portage's madwifi now supports the Macbook Pro
>> chipset... I had to use SVN one at the time.
> 
> The drivers might be in the kernel now. I was using madwifi-ng and changed to the ath5k driver at around 2.6.26 or 27.

Uh, good to know.

But anyway, no major pitfalls/bad experiences in the last year's kernel
I should be aware of?

m.

Re: [gentoo-user] upgrading from kernel 2.6.24-rc6 to latest kernel

[Paul Hartman]

On Wed, May 13, 2009 at 3:14 PM, bn <brullonulla@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yes, but this means recompiling all external modules (nvidia, madwifi)
> every time I boot in a new kernel if I want them to work, isn't it?

I think those modules get installed into kernel-version-specific
directories in /lib/modules so that may not be a problem.

[gentoo-user] Re: upgrading from kernel 2.6.24-rc6 to latest kernel

[Nikos Chantziaras]

bn wrote:
>> You can keep both kernels and just use the bootloader to select which one to boot into. So if your new kernel doesn't work just reboot and use your old kernel again until you can work out whats wrong with the new one.
> 
> Yes, but this means recompiling all external modules (nvidia, madwifi)
> every time I boot in a new kernel if I want them to work, isn't it?

No.  Kernel modules are kept in /lib/modules/VERSION/ meaning you will 
have the older ones working when you boot the older kernel again.

Re: [gentoo-user] Re: upgrading from kernel 2.6.24-rc6 to latest kernel

[bn]

Nikos Chantziaras ha scritto:
> bn wrote:
>>> You can keep both kernels and just use the bootloader to select which
>>> one to boot into. So if your new kernel doesn't work just reboot and
>>> use your old kernel again until you can work out whats wrong with the
>>> new one.
>>
>> Yes, but this means recompiling all external modules (nvidia, madwifi)
>> every time I boot in a new kernel if I want them to work, isn't it?
> 
> No.  Kernel modules are kept in /lib/modules/VERSION/ meaning you will
> have the older ones working when you boot the older kernel again.
> 

Oh, I didn't know, thanks. It's incredible that after 5 years of using
Linux I am still so utterly clueless!

Thanks guys.

m.

Re: [gentoo-user] upgrading from kernel 2.6.24-rc6 to latest kernel

[bn]

bn ha scritto:
> 2) What are the caveats and pitfalls I should be aware of when upgrading
> to latest kernel? I confess that reading CHANGELOGs didn't help me too
> much, quite confusing.

I resume this thread because I read ofthings like that ("/dev/sr0 has
disappeared" thread):
"> You need to enable this to make CONFIG_PATA_JMICRON visible.

 ... THAT's what happened to it !!  This is the change in 2.6.29
(it could have been in 2.6.26-8 , which I didn't install).

So having enabled these two options, I now get  /dev/sr0
& can read & write (at least blank) a CD again.

This is another trap in configuring a new kernel,
ie some needed option is moved &/or needs another enabled to see it.
Another trap I ran into briefly was a field needing a string,
which looks as if all it needs is 'y/n' (also in 2.6.29)."

So, what kind of traps like that should I expect?

cheers,
m.

Re: [gentoo-user] upgrading from kernel 2.6.24-rc6 to latest kernel

[Sean]

On Sun, 2009-05-17 at 16:46 +0100, bn wrote:
> So, what kind of traps like that should I expect?

I expect things like that to have potentially changed with every point
release of the 2.6 kernel, since the numbering scheme is practically
useless now. Every 2.6.XX release has the potential for major changes.

Typically I will run a make oldconfig and then walk through the
menuconfig options. I don't consider it a pleasant exercise, but since I
don't upgrade the kernel very much it's not so terrible.

-Sean

Re: [gentoo-user] upgrading from kernel 2.6.24-rc6 to latest kernel

[Philip Webb]

090517 bn wrote:
> What are the caveats and pitfalls I should be aware of
> when upgrading to latest kernel?  I resume this thread
> because I read of things like  "/dev/sr0 has disappeared" 
>> & "You need to enable this to make CONFIG_PATA_JMICRON visible.
>>  ... THAT's what happened to it !!  This is the change in 2.6.29
>> (it could have been in 2.6.26-8 , which I didn't install).
>> So having enabled these two options, I now get  /dev/sr0
>> & can read & write (at least blank) a CD again.
>> This is another trap in configuring a new kernel,
>> ie some needed option is moved &/or needs another enabled to see it.
>> Another trap I ran into briefly was a field needing a string,
>> which looks as if all it needs is 'y/n' (also in 2.6.29)."
> So, what kind of traps like that should I expect?

That's part of the fun: you don't know what will hit you till it does !
As the OP of the above quote, my own resolution is to upgrade more often.

'make oldconfig' is the usual recommendation, but there's no help:
it's just a list of "Do you want to ... ?" which you can't save easily.
I upgraded from 2.6.25 & that was the only real problem,
which was caused by a change in 'make menuconfig' layout,
so I'ld say go ahead, but step cautiously thro' the configuration,
then test everything afterwards (I didn't find out re CDs till just now).

Each new kernel sb accompanied by a list of changes in configuration
with a short help paragraph for each: at present, that's missing.
Something to for Gentoo devs to nag upstream to get improved (smile).

-- 
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT     ___________//___,   Philip Webb
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|   Cities Centre, University of Toronto
TRANSIT    `-O----------O---'   purslowatchassdotutorontodotca

Re: [gentoo-user] upgrading from kernel 2.6.24-rc6 to latest kernel

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 378 bytes --]

On Sun, 17 May 2009 12:18:14 -0400, Philip Webb wrote:

> 'make oldconfig' is the usual recommendation, but there's no help:
> it's just a list of "Do you want to ... ?" which you can't save easily.

Of course there;s help. Most options give a choice of y/n/m/?. Guess what
happens when you press?


-- 
Neil Bothwick

WinErr 001: Windows loaded - System in danger

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] upgrading from kernel 2.6.24-rc6 to latest kernel

[Dale]

Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Sun, 17 May 2009 12:18:14 -0400, Philip Webb wrote:
>
>   
>> 'make oldconfig' is the usual recommendation, but there's no help:
>> it's just a list of "Do you want to ... ?" which you can't save easily.
>>     
>
> Of course there;s help. Most options give a choice of y/n/m/?. Guess what
> happens when you press?
>
>
>   

Usually something that doesn't make much sense.  Happens here all the
time.  Same as a man page.  I just need a brighter light bulb I guess. 
;-) 

Dale

:-)  :-) 

Re: [gentoo-user] upgrading from kernel 2.6.24-rc6 to latest kernel

[Philip Webb]

090517 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Sun, 17 May 2009 12:18:14 -0400, Philip Webb wrote:
>> 'make oldconfig' is the usual recommendation, but there's no help:
>> it's just a list of "Do you want to ... ?" which you can't save easily.
> Of course there's help.  Most options give a choice of y/n/m/?.

Yes (red face).  However, the crucial option here was ATA_SFF ,
for which 'make oldconfig' gives :

  ATA SFF support (ATA_SFF) [Y/n/?] (NEW) ?

  This option adds support for ATA controllers with SFF
  compliant or similar programming interface.

  SFF is the legacy IDE interface that has been around since
  the dawn of time.  Almost all PATA controllers have an
  SFF interface.  Many SATA controllers have an SFF interface
  when configured into a legacy compatibility mode.

  For users with exclusively modern controllers like AHCI,
  Silicon Image 3124, or Marvell 6440, you may choose to
  disable this uneeded SFF support.

  If unsure, say Y.

The blurb tells me nothing, but if I follow its advice, I do get :

  ...
  JMicron PATA support (PATA_JMICRON) [Y/n/m/?] y

which was what I needed (and now have).

What the blurb should have added is the following,
which occurs somewhat later in the config interview :

  X86 Platform Specific Device Drivers (X86_PLATFORM_DEVICES) [Y/n/?] (NEW) ?

  Say Y here to get to see options for device drivers for various
  x86 platforms, including vendor-specific laptop extension drivers.
  This option alone does not add any kernel code.

  If you say N, all options in this submenu will be skipped and disabled.

-- 
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT     ___________//___,   Philip Webb
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|   Cities Centre, University of Toronto
TRANSIT    `-O----------O---'   purslowatchassdotutorontodotca

Re: [gentoo-user] upgrading from kernel 2.6.24-rc6 to latest kernel

[Neil Bothwick]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1295 bytes --]

On Mon, 18 May 2009 07:29:00 -0400, Philip Webb wrote:

> > Of course there's help.  Most options give a choice of y/n/m/?.  
> 
> Yes (red face).  However, the crucial option here was ATA_SFF ,
> for which 'make oldconfig' gives :
> 
>   ATA SFF support (ATA_SFF) [Y/n/?] (NEW) ?
> 
>   This option adds support for ATA controllers with SFF
>   compliant or similar programming interface.
> 
>   SFF is the legacy IDE interface that has been around since
>   the dawn of time.  Almost all PATA controllers have an
>   SFF interface.  Many SATA controllers have an SFF interface
>   when configured into a legacy compatibility mode.
> 
>   For users with exclusively modern controllers like AHCI,
>   Silicon Image 3124, or Marvell 6440, you may choose to
>   disable this uneeded SFF support.
> 
>   If unsure, say Y.
> 
> The blurb tells me nothing, but if I follow its advice, I do get :

I said there was help, I didn't claim it was helpful :)

I got bitten by this one a while ago on a box using a mixture of SATA and
PATA disks, the PATA disk disappeared after an upgrade because I took
the help to indicate I didn't need it I should have followed the "If
unsure..." advice.


-- 
Neil Bothwick

Beware of the dragon: Trespassers will be flame-grilled

[-- Attachment #2: signature.asc --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 198 bytes --]

Re: [gentoo-user] upgrading from kernel 2.6.24-rc6 to latest kernel

[Philip Webb]

090518 Neil Bothwick wrote:
> On Mon, 18 May 2009 07:29:00 -0400, Philip Webb wrote:
>> The blurb tells me nothing, but if I follow its advice, I do get :
> I said there was help, I didn't claim it was helpful :)
> I got bitten by this one a while ago on a box using a mixture
> of SATA and PATA disks, the PATA disk disappeared after an upgrade
> because I took the help to indicate I didn't need it.
> I should have followed the "If unsure..." advice.

Yes, had I realised there was help available via '?',
I would have seen that line & would have taken the advice,
when I would also have seen the JMicron line marked 'y'.

I have updated the file which contains my kernel notes (wry smile).

Hopefully, the OP has got some useful hints out of all this ...

-- 
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT     ___________//___,   Philip Webb
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|   Cities Centre, University of Toronto
TRANSIT    `-O----------O---'   purslowatchassdotutorontodotca

Re: [gentoo-user] upgrading from kernel 2.6.24-rc6 to latest kernel

[bn]

Philip Webb ha scritto:
> 090518 Neil Bothwick wrote:
>> On Mon, 18 May 2009 07:29:00 -0400, Philip Webb wrote:
>>> The blurb tells me nothing, but if I follow its advice, I do get :
>> I said there was help, I didn't claim it was helpful :)
>> I got bitten by this one a while ago on a box using a mixture
>> of SATA and PATA disks, the PATA disk disappeared after an upgrade
>> because I took the help to indicate I didn't need it.
>> I should have followed the "If unsure..." advice.
> 
> Yes, had I realised there was help available via '?',
> I would have seen that line & would have taken the advice,
> when I would also have seen the JMicron line marked 'y'.
> 
> I have updated the file which contains my kernel notes (wry smile).
> 
> Hopefully, the OP has got some useful hints out of all this ...

Yes. I'm kinda considering switching to Ubuntu.

I love Gentoo, it's almost 4 years I'm using it, but I need this laptop
to *work*, and I cannot afford to be consistently bitten by such unknowns.

My only concern is that Ubuntu won't be better in the long end (even if
I used it at work for years and I always felt comfortable with it),
because of the upgrade/reinstall cycles.


m.

Re: [gentoo-user] upgrading from kernel 2.6.24-rc6 to latest kernel

[Philip Webb]

090518 bn wrote:
> Philip Webb ha scritto:
>> Hopefully, the OP has got some useful hints out of all this ...
> Yes. I'm kinda considering switching to Ubuntu.
> I love Gentoo, it's almost 4 years I'm using it, but I need this laptop
> to *work*, and I cannot afford to be consistently bitten by such unknowns.
> My only concern is that Ubuntu won't be better in the long end
> (even if I used it at work for years and I always felt comfortable with it),
> because of the upgrade/reinstall cycles.

Well, you can get bitten by such things with any distro
-- perhaps Slackware has the best reputation for utter reliability -- ,
but with Gentoo you do have the ability to fix anything yourself,
even if it does need a bit of time to get advice & act on it;
you can also make notes to ensure you don't get bitten a 2nd time.
With binary distros, you are stuck with whatever their makers give you.

-- 
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT     ___________//___,   Philip Webb
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|   Cities Centre, University of Toronto
TRANSIT    `-O----------O---'   purslowatchassdotutorontodotca

Re: [gentoo-user] upgrading from kernel 2.6.24-rc6 to latest kernel

[bn]

Philip Webb ha scritto:
> 090518 bn wrote:
>> Philip Webb ha scritto:
>>> Hopefully, the OP has got some useful hints out of all this ...
>> Yes. I'm kinda considering switching to Ubuntu.
>> I love Gentoo, it's almost 4 years I'm using it, but I need this laptop
>> to *work*, and I cannot afford to be consistently bitten by such unknowns.
>> My only concern is that Ubuntu won't be better in the long end
>> (even if I used it at work for years and I always felt comfortable with it),
>> because of the upgrade/reinstall cycles.
> 
> Well, you can get bitten by such things with any distro
> -- perhaps Slackware has the best reputation for utter reliability -- ,
> but with Gentoo you do have the ability to fix anything yourself,
> even if it does need a bit of time to get advice & act on it;
> you can also make notes to ensure you don't get bitten a 2nd time.
> With binary distros, you are stuck with whatever their makers give you.

This is a common claim in this ML which I never completely understood.

I mean, whatever distro you're using, Linux is Linux. You're not locked
out. If my xorg.conf doesn't work (it happened with Ubuntu), I can edit
it on Ubuntu just like on Gentoo. I can compile source packages on
Ubuntu too, if needed.

Gentoo is nice because you don't have to upgrade all at once but
gradually, and because you can choose from the start, so I liked it.

But anyway you have packages in Gentoo or in Ubuntu: in Gentoo you are
stuck with what whatever the packagers give you the same. You probably
have more versions available and some more flexibility, but that's it.

So, I would really want to understand where the Gentoo flexibility beats
down a binary distro.

Don't get me wrong -I like Gentoo. Really. But the claim that a binary
distro is "unfixable" just because I had someone compiling it for me
instead of having emerge doing the job, looks odd to me.

m.

Re: [gentoo-user] upgrading from kernel 2.6.24-rc6 to latest kernel

[William Hubbs]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 05:42:54PM +0100, bn wrote:
> So, I would really want to understand where the Gentoo flexibility beats
> down a binary distro.
> 
> Don't get me wrong -I like Gentoo. Really. But the claim that a binary
> distro is "unfixable" just because I had someone compiling it for me
> instead of having emerge doing the job, looks odd to me.

For me, one big difference is in our use flags.

Binary distros have to force you to install packages with all of their
dependencies, but that is not required on gentoo since you can select
which features you want to support.

Another difference is that, since you are compiling everything from
source, with the correct CFLAGS and CXXFLAGS settings in make.conf, you
can optimize the binaries you produce to take full advantage of your
processor, which you can't do on a binary distro since everything is
already compiled for you.

- -- 
William Hubbs
gentoo accessibility team lead
williamh@gentoo.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.11 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAkoRlvYACgkQblQW9DDEZThkyQCfc7F/1/rGuhVFq2xxtb57fmc7
AT4AnRQSLghiBHkREKly3le7rGN8fYsA
=z+CH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: [gentoo-user] upgrading from kernel 2.6.24-rc6 to latest kernel

[Alan McKinnon]

On Monday 18 May 2009 19:12:22 William Hubbs wrote:
> Another difference is that, since you are compiling everything from
> source, with the correct CFLAGS and CXXFLAGS settings in make.conf, you
> can optimize the binaries you produce to take full advantage of your
> processor, which you can't do on a binary distro since everything is
> already compiled for you.

Another word:

That's ricing.

Ok, that's two words. You get the idea.

-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] upgrading from kernel 2.6.24-rc6 to latest kernel

[Alan McKinnon]

On Monday 18 May 2009 19:59:14 William Hubbs wrote:
> On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 07:39:48PM +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote:
> > On Monday 18 May 2009 19:12:22 William Hubbs wrote:
> > > Another difference is that, since you are compiling everything from
> > > source, with the correct CFLAGS and CXXFLAGS settings in make.conf, you
> > > can optimize the binaries you produce to take full advantage of your
> > > processor, which you can't do on a binary distro since everything is
> > > already compiled for you.
> >
> > Another word:
> >
> > That's ricing.
> >
> > Ok, that's two words. You get the idea.
>
>  Actually, I don't, because I don't know what you mean.  I was just
>  pointing out something about gentoo which  I think is different from a
>  binary distribution.  I don't know how much of a difference it makes,
>  but it is a feature they don't have.

The cases where one really does need to optimize the compiler for your cpu are 
very rare, and only really apply to old hardware. Back in the day they 
performed fine, but code available today tends to do more (keeping pace with 
cpu capability) so you need to tweak things to extract the best performance.

If using current packages on current hardware, the benefit is questionable and 
users are highly unlikely to notice much difference between good old i686 and 
-O9. With some apps it does make a difference - extensive floating point ops 
comes to mind - and one should take advantage of those cases. However, looking 
into the ebuilds of such packages usually reveals that, if the maintainer is 
any good, those optimizations are already present in the ebuild.

Years ago Gentoo had a problem with fanatical moronic users claiming their 
machines performed a brazillion time faster with -O9 and other such nonsense. 
This is called "ricing" - a word play on young Japanese males modifying 
Subarus for "performance" that actually reduces performance. Ever seen a 
Subaru with a gigantic whale-tail rear spoiler? That's ricing. These Gentoo 
users seem to have gone away to wherever the current fashion fad is. For a 
while they infested Ubuntu. $DEITY only knows where they are now, maybe 
they're using MacOS and annoying Steve

Actual benchmarks should that ricing does nothing beneficial for the average 
ricer.

Genuine analysis of Gentoo machines admined by someone who knows how to do it 
should that the machine can easily have only the features and software on it 
that the admin say it should have. Like LDAP - not everyone needs it. On a 
binary distro, if the maintainer supports it you usually get it too whether 
you like it or not. With Gentoo, USE is your friend. And this is gentoo's 
greatest strength - the ability to build something much closer to what you 
really want than is possible with a binary distro.

-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] upgrading from kernel 2.6.24-rc6 to latest kernel

[Dale]

Alan McKinnon wrote:
>
> Genuine analysis of Gentoo machines admined by someone who knows how to do it 
> should that the machine can easily have only the features and software on it 
> that the admin say it should have. Like LDAP - not everyone needs it. On a 
> binary distro, if the maintainer supports it you usually get it too whether 
> you like it or not. With Gentoo, USE is your friend. And this is gentoo's 
> greatest strength - the ability to build something much closer to what you 
> really want than is possible with a binary distro.
>
>   

I can say this when comparing this rig running Mandrake and Gentoo. 
Gentoo boots a LOT faster, apps open faster and there are fewer programs
installed.  This can save on disk space if distfiles are cleaned out.  I
don't clean mine but a person on broadband could or just share over a
network.  Mandrake is just plain slow as syrup at the north pole.  I may
have to test this theory one day.  Actually do some measurements.  only
thing is, Mandriva would have older packages in some cases since Gentoo
updates more often.

For me, Gentoo is just as customizable as Linus from Scratch but with a
nice package manager.  That's how a describe Gentoo to someone who is at
least part geek or a full blooded nerd.  ;-)

Dale

:-)  :-) 

Re: [gentoo-user] upgrading from kernel 2.6.24-rc6 to latest kernel

[Dale]

William Hubbs wrote:
> On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 05:42:54PM +0100, bn wrote:
> > So, I would really want to understand where the Gentoo flexibility beats
> > down a binary distro.
>
> > Don't get me wrong -I like Gentoo. Really. But the claim that a binary
> > distro is "unfixable" just because I had someone compiling it for me
> > instead of having emerge doing the job, looks odd to me.
>
> For me, one big difference is in our use flags.
>
> Binary distros have to force you to install packages with all of their
> dependencies, but that is not required on gentoo since you can select
> which features you want to support.
>
> Another difference is that, since you are compiling everything from
> source, with the correct CFLAGS and CXXFLAGS settings in make.conf, you
> can optimize the binaries you produce to take full advantage of your
> processor, which you can't do on a binary distro since everything is
> already compiled for you.
>

I agree with this 100%.  I remember Mandrake and how it would install a
whole bunch of stuff just because I selected one package.  It wasn't
that they were a dependency or anything but that the only choice you had
was 'all or nothing'.  They built-in support for a lot of things when
they built a package so it pulled in all its buddies to.  This and the
upgrade process was why I switched to Gentoo. 

Dale

:-)  :-) 

Re: [gentoo-user] upgrading from kernel 2.6.24-rc6 to latest kernel

[Alan McKinnon]

On Monday 18 May 2009 18:42:54 bn wrote:
> But anyway you have packages in Gentoo or in Ubuntu: in Gentoo you are
> stuck with what whatever the packagers give you the same. You probably
> have more versions available and some more flexibility, but that's it.
>
> So, I would really want to understand where the Gentoo flexibility beats
> down a binary distro.

One word:

USE

-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] upgrading from kernel 2.6.24-rc6 to latest kernel

[Philip Webb]

090518 bn wrote:
> Philip Webb ha scritto:
>> With binary distros, you are stuck with whatever their makers give you.
> whatever distro you're using, Linux is Linux. You're not locked out.
> If my xorg.conf doesn't work (it happened with Ubuntu),
> I can edit it on Ubuntu just like on Gentoo.
> I can compile source packages on Ubuntu too, if needed.

But don't you immediately run into all the settings & assumptions
which the creators of that release of that distro have made for you ?
Can you have multiple versions of a library (as via Gentoo's slots) ?

You're also stuck with their kernel:
how many users of Mandriva compile their own kernels ?
how safe is it to use your own kernel with the rest of the distro ?

You also have to accept their version of big items like KDE :
if you use Slackware, you've got to use KDE 4 , like it or not (me: not);
with Gentoo, you can go on using KDE 3 & its pieces much longer.

If you use Ubuntu, you've got to accept their eccentric & questionable
attitude to passwords, esp that they don't have a separate root password.
I find that a piece of cheap popularisation contrary to UNIX principles.

So if you use Mandriva or Slackware -- good binary distros both -- ,
you accept what's been cooked for you & are one of the crowd of diners.
If you use Gentoo, you enjoy your own home cooking.

-- 
========================,,============================================
SUPPORT     ___________//___,   Philip Webb
ELECTRIC   /] [] [] [] [] []|   Cities Centre, University of Toronto
TRANSIT    `-O----------O---'   purslowatchassdotutorontodotca

Re: [gentoo-user] upgrading from kernel 2.6.24-rc6 to latest kernel

[bn]

Philip Webb ha scritto:
> 090518 bn wrote:
>> Philip Webb ha scritto:
>>> With binary distros, you are stuck with whatever their makers give you.
>> whatever distro you're using, Linux is Linux. You're not locked out.
>> If my xorg.conf doesn't work (it happened with Ubuntu),
>> I can edit it on Ubuntu just like on Gentoo.
>> I can compile source packages on Ubuntu too, if needed.
> 
> But don't you immediately run into all the settings & assumptions
> which the creators of that release of that distro have made for you ?

Yes. Which usually are sensible, and when they're not, I can usually
modify them.
Don't you immediately run into all the default settings and assumptions
that the creators of each $PACKAGE do even here? Or do you write all
your KDE configuration files by hand before running it the first time?

> Can you have multiple versions of a library (as via Gentoo's slots) ?

This, I don't know and it's an interesting thing. *Some* package is
available in more versions on binary distros, but I dunno how they
manage that.

> You're also stuck with their kernel:
> how many users of Mandriva compile their own kernels ?
> how safe is it to use your own kernel with the rest of the distro ?

True. Having a slimmer kernel is nice; however compiling your own kernel
 is not always failsafe even for fairly knowledgeable users (that's why
I started the thread).

> You also have to accept their version of big items like KDE :
> if you use Slackware, you've got to use KDE 4 , like it or not (me: not);
> with Gentoo, you can go on using KDE 3 & its pieces much longer.

Yes, but for example I would like to try KDE4 --> requires ~x86 -->
mixing x86 and ~x86 for such big stuff is bad. Gentoo x86 is way behind
binary distros' stable packages, and that's another pain.

> If you use Ubuntu, you've got to accept their eccentric & questionable
> attitude to passwords, esp that they don't have a separate root password.
> I find that a piece of cheap popularisation contrary to UNIX principles.

I found it very useful and it makes much sense in my opinion -so much
that I would like to know how to fully "ubuntize" my Gentoo in this
single respect. I don't maybe like it's pulled down the throat of users,
but if they had the option to choose between both with,say,one
installation option click, it would be perfect.

> So if you use Mandriva or Slackware -- good binary distros both -- ,
> you accept what's been cooked for you & are one of the crowd of diners.
> If you use Gentoo, you enjoy your own home cooking.

Even if I'm Italian, I'm maybe not such a good cook :)

The problem is another. I loved Gentoo when I was an undergraduate or
graduate student and I had my own desktop at home to tinker with,
separate from my workstation in the office.

Now I am working abroad and I cannot have root access on my workstation.
So the workstation is almost worthless, apart from specialized needs
that require me to work on it. If I want to be productive, I need to use
my own laptop. And I simply cannot afford this laptop to go awry. That's
why I am so shy in updating xorg and the kernel now. I will do it, but I
want to be quadruple-sure of everything I can. And that's why I am
beginning to think Ubuntu fast-food could be better than my own cuisine....

m.

Re: [gentoo-user] upgrading from kernel 2.6.24-rc6 to latest kernel

[Alan McKinnon]

On Monday 18 May 2009 22:14:43 bn wrote:
> > If you use Ubuntu, you've got to accept their eccentric & questionable
> > attitude to passwords, esp that they don't have a separate root password.
> > I find that a piece of cheap popularisation contrary to UNIX principles.

Huh?

The package you are talking about is sudo. Might I add that sudo follows the 
grand time honoured tradition of the principle of least priviledge whereas su 
does not?

su offers no means to selectively allow what a user may and may not be 
authorised to do. It's an all or nothing approach, much like running Windows 
as admin. A separate root password gives no real extra safety - the user 
becoming root still has to be in the wheel group, and still has to prove who 
they are by a process of authentication. For servers, this is brilliant. Log 
in with keys, sudo with a password (which you keep just as safe as a root 
password).
 
> I found it very useful and it makes much sense in my opinion -so much
> that I would like to know how to fully "ubuntize" my Gentoo in this
> single respect. 

Easy peasy:

emerge sudo
sudoedit
add desired users to wheel group
[test]
replace root password in shadow with "!"

Please note that this is not an Ubuntu thing. It's simply using sudo in one of 
the ways sudo was specifically designed to be used.

> I don't maybe like it's pulled down the throat of users,
> but if they had the option to choose between both with,say,one
> installation option click, it would be perfect.

Even easier. As first user created (administrative user):

sudo passwd
[forget sudo exists]

-- 
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com

Re: [gentoo-user] upgrading from kernel 2.6.24-rc6 to latest kernel

[bn]

Alan McKinnon ha scritto:
> On Monday 18 May 2009 22:14:43 bn wrote:
>>> If you use Ubuntu, you've got to accept their eccentric & questionable
>>> attitude to passwords, esp that they don't have a separate root password.
>>> I find that a piece of cheap popularisation contrary to UNIX principles.
> 
> Huh?
> 
> The package you are talking about is sudo. Might I add that sudo follows the 
> grand time honoured tradition of the principle of least priviledge whereas su 
> does not?

As far as I know it is not enough to just use sudo. When a GUI program
requires admin privileges, it will usually ask the root password. On
Ubuntu, it will instead "sudo" its privileges. That's the thing, I think
Ubuntu patches its software to behave properly with its own sudo thing.

But it's not a big deal, it's just a feature which made sense to me but
I can live very happily also with the good old Unix way.

m.