[gentoo-user] Re: Profile listings

[James <wireless@tampabay.rr.com>]

Martin Vaeth <martin <at> mvath.de> writes:

> 
> James <wireless <at> tampabay.rr.com> wrote:
> >
> > # PORTAGE_PROFILE=/usr/portage/profiles/arch/arm/armv7a eix -c --system
> > No matches found.
> 
> Obviously, this profile contains no  <at> system packages.
> Which appears natural for an embedded profile...

Obviously, one cannot obtain the profiles to other arches from the 
data found in /usr/portage/profile, easily. Surely a front-end would be keen
for this.

Also, I had a friend on an embedded gentoo (arm) board verify  that the same
42 files for @system was installed on his arm board (eix -e --system).


I surely hope that something (gui tool) convenient and robust becomes
available; maybe GLEP64 will help.

For embedded (any arch) I would expect that the @system would not contain
all the files necessary to compile code. After all, that's really what
cross-compiling is all about. I'm not sure a single packages, such as
busybox really contains the best/complete codes that is needed on an
embedded gentoo system, but that is a different issue.


I also think there is room for another profile, between default and embedded
where the target is a single (or focused) build for something like a
sniffer, a data collector, a firewall, a bridge, a router, etc etc
to have less than the "default" profile and specifically matched to
a tuned (aggressively pruned) kernel for a very specific and limited
purpose.  That said, I'm going to think about this a bit more and marinate
over the postings from Andreas and others for a while  longer to decide what
I think it should really be. 


I also think there should be a well defined path of what and how to migrate
from embedded to minimized[focused] and default systems. One could
experiment for example experiment with running a gentoo based
firewall-router on an embedded gentoo system, a minimized[focused] gentoo 
system and a default profile gentoo system all with the same 
firewall-routers codes for cost and security and performance evaluations.



Thanks to all for the excellent information and input! Sorry about being
dense, as now Andreas's posts make more sense, but also highlight the
shortness of breadth of gentoo's current profile system. It's also a 
"pig mess" of code, ideas and old constructs, imho. (note: nothing negative
about the wonderful folks that have maintained and extended profiles over
the years, but, it is time for a discussion and new architecture for the
entire profile landscape, imho. Maybe after Glep 64 is usable it would be
a good time to move forward on profile_modernizations......


Others comments are welcome.


James