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 8AD351381F3 for ; Mon, 9 Sep 2013 19:40:09 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 5DCBFE0C4B; Mon, 9 Sep 2013 19:39:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-yh0-f41.google.com (mail-yh0-f41.google.com [209.85.213.41]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4F035E0C29 for ; Mon, 9 Sep 2013 19:39:56 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-yh0-f41.google.com with SMTP id f73so2479993yha.14 for ; Mon, 09 Sep 2013 12:39:55 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type; bh=re1+dVlni2KvSf3IH8xEI5rS5RfaSPPtHncdWU9aPG0=; b=lEjvT62ZrOQYm0BQguG/I5PljX/kOGspMNKR5tOZqJ2zv1hnAKzLkmtJhz02zldZOT +P0U1M/ypKc6ulEE4LQ6/r0mXioZ/IInxVXFcrrzpPqRjaxQC8mehfc5ZP4hDoHkYV7K yhmWThtXc21yKXaXmOG3qaZCkJ2VMe3jV4O9D/GiJehPtWQ+5VeD6UbC+J6xz5RIhzhQ 3s43sWhy1/1uVj0kLGzxxrokfiiGJgTl9UzTinheftrAUeolEI262jx5WkEjKnfpm6Uq qejgMyekTwDZAolqjEJCxZ8+4qbvbkrm7yXQ0h68a8q/U+r1KeemB7GlXGhG/3t53rFO JmWA== X-Received: by 10.236.149.17 with SMTP id w17mr18115425yhj.34.1378755595481; Mon, 09 Sep 2013 12:39:55 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.2.5] (adsl-65-0-115-2.jan.bellsouth.net. [65.0.115.2]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id e65sm19449332yhc.18.1969.12.31.16.00.00 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Mon, 09 Sep 2013 12:39:54 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <522E2409.60305@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 09 Sep 2013 14:39:53 -0500 From: Dale User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:23.0) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/23.0 SeaMonkey/2.20 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] creating an image of the system References: <20130908185125.GA18762@zlug.org> <522D6B00.2050404@hadt.biz> <20130909190540.GC18762@zlug.org> <522E1FCB.30801@hadt.biz> In-Reply-To: <522E1FCB.30801@hadt.biz> X-Enigmail-Version: 1.5.2 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------030005000002010003060203" X-Archives-Salt: 0719e860-c11c-479f-a0f0-92ea956c5d5d X-Archives-Hash: 302e61833ebc09d39d22de8c7568b348 This is a multi-part message in MIME format. --------------030005000002010003060203 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Michael Hampicke wrote: > Am 09.09.2013 21:05, schrieb Benjamin Block: >> On 08:30 Mon 09 Sep , Michael Hampicke wrote: >>> Am 08.09.2013 20:51, schrieb Benjamin Block: >>>> Hej folks, >>>> >>>> I wonder what is a good way to create an image of a gentoo-system, so >>>> that one can apply it later to the same or other computers. >>>> >>>> In my case it is a rather simple setup: one partition, no encryption or >>>> lvm. Its a debug-setup, so its only used for certain programming-tasks >>>> and not for daily work, so no need for something fancy. The time I setup >>>> that system I also used only conservative compilation-flags and >>>> optimisation, so that it can be used on other CPUs (well, they have to >>>> be x86_64 and have to have mmx/sse[23] - but I think every setup that I >>>> intend to use this on will have these properties). >>>> >>>> So I reckon that one could just use tar with permission-preservation and >>>> some excludes like dev/sys/proc/tmp. But is this a good idea or is there >>>> a better way to do this? I never cloned a gentoo-system, so thats why I >>>> would like to be at least somewhat sure about it, so that I don't have >>>> to reconfigure it later again, because I messed it up :D >>>> >>> >>> Tar with permission preservation is fine. Just exlude everything in >>> dev/sys/proc/tmp as you said. But make sure, that these directories are >>> in your tar file, it does not matter if they are empty, but they have to >>> exist in order to boot proplery. >>> >>> One special case. To boot you most likely will need /dev/console and >>> /dev/null. Just inlcude those two device nodes in your tar file. >>> >> >> Thanks for pointing that out, but why are these both special? Seems to >> me like these are also (char)device-nodes and shouldn't they also be >> generated by the kernel with DEVTMPFS and then udev at a very early >> init-stage? > > If you have DEVTMPFS enabled you should be fine. But not everybody has > that enabled, or even uses udev :-) > I would include them just in case. Why take the chance that it fails for whatever reason. Dale :-) :-) -- I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words! --------------030005000002010003060203 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Michael Hampicke wrote:
> Am 09.09.2013 21:05, schrieb Benjamin Block:
>> On 08:30 Mon 09 Sep     , Michael Hampicke wrote:
>>> Am 08.09.2013 20:51, schrieb Benjamin Block:
>>>> Hej folks,
>>>>
>>>> I wonder what is a good way to create an image of a gentoo-system, so
>>>> that one can apply it later to the same or other computers.
>>>>
>>>> In my case it is a rather simple setup: one partition, no encryption or
>>>> lvm. Its a debug-setup, so its only used for certain programming-tasks
>>>> and not for daily work, so no need for something fancy. The time I setup
>>>> that system I also used only conservative compilation-flags and
>>>> optimisation, so that it can be used on other CPUs (well, they have to
>>>> be x86_64 and have to have mmx/sse[23] - but I think every setup that I
>>>> intend to use this on will have these properties).
>>>>
>>>> So I reckon that one could just use tar with permission-preservation and
>>>> some excludes like dev/sys/proc/tmp. But is this a good idea or is there
>>>> a better way to do this? I never cloned a gentoo-system, so thats why I
>>>> would like to be at least somewhat sure about it, so that I don't have
>>>> to reconfigure it later again, because I messed it up :D
>>>>
>>>
>>> Tar with permission preservation is fine. Just exlude everything in
>>> dev/sys/proc/tmp as you said. But make sure, that these directories are
>>> in your tar file, it does not matter if they are empty, but they have to
>>> exist in order to boot proplery.
>>>
>>> One special case. To boot you most likely will need /dev/console and
>>> /dev/null. Just inlcude those two device nodes in your tar file.
>>>
>>
>> Thanks for pointing that out, but why are these both special? Seems to
>> me like these are also (char)device-nodes and shouldn't they also be
>> generated by the kernel with DEVTMPFS and then udev at a very early
>> init-stage?
>
> If you have DEVTMPFS enabled you should be fine. But not everybody has
> that enabled, or even uses udev :-)
>

I would include them just in case.  Why take the chance that it fails for whatever reason.

Dale

:-)  :-)

--
I am only responsible for what I said ... Not for what you understood or how you interpreted my words!

--------------030005000002010003060203--