From: Cedric Veilleux (cedric_at_neopeak.com)
Date: Sat 22 Mar 2003 - 17:12:12 GMT
Here's a reply to myself because I found a new way to filter config files from
a package's list of files in order to unify it.
The "epm" command has a -c switch, that allows to list only config files.
# epm -ql freenet-0.5.0.6
/var/freenet/stats
/usr/lib/freenet/freenet.jar
/usr/lib/freenet/freenet-ext.jar
/etc/freenet.conf
/etc/init.d/freenet
# epm -qc freenet-0.5.0.6
/etc/freenet.conf
/etc/init.d/freenet
vunify.cc would have to be modified slightly. We could also try to have epm
fixed so it gives an identical output as of vunify expects rpm to behave.
If we modify vunify.cc, how can we do it elegantly, so redhat support is not
lost? The command would need to determine with which distribution it is
dealing. May be add a command line argument --distro that defaults to redhat?
Cedric
Le 22 Mars 2003 11:53, vous avez écrit :
> Hi,
>
> Gentoo's package management system is ideal to run a vserver. A vserver
> "profile" could be created. A profile in gentoo's package management system
> is a set of default package that must be installed or not-installed for a
> specific architecture. With a vserver profile, we could have portage setup
> a valid vserver automatically with no need of the newvserver command.
>
> A few additional ebuild would be necessary. I've included the
> vserver-sources ebuild that installs and patch the source, it is for ctx16.
>
> Another ebuild is needed for the host system, for the vserver utilities.
> The problem is that they do not work well with gentoo in their current
> state. Main problem is the newvserver and vserver script that must be
> modified slightly I think. Also, unification is rpm centric and I started
> experimenting with the "epm" command in gentoo (sys-apps/epm) that tries to
> emulate the rpm but works directly with gentoo's native packaging system.
>
> Having no access to a redhat system with "rpm" command, I don't know how
> close "epm" comes to emulate the rpm output and interface.. Here's how it
> looks:
>
>
> # epm -qa
> addpatches-0.2
> kportage-0.6.1
> metalog-0.6-r10
> fam-oss-2.6.9-r1
> mirrorselect-0.2-r1
> gentoolkit-0.1.19-r3
> cabextract-0.6
> ncompress-4.2.4
> rpm-4.0.4-r4
> unzip-5.50-r1
> zip-2.3-r1
> gnupg-1.2.1-r1
> freenet-0.5.0.6
> mhash-0.8.16
> [...]
>
>
> # epm -ql --dump freenet-0.5.0.6
> dir /var
> dir /var/freenet
> dir /var/freenet/stats
> dir /usr
> dir /usr/lib
> dir /usr/lib/freenet
> obj /usr/lib/freenet/freenet.jar a5fc4695d76156acdfc8b935d6c871f2
> 1046561669 obj /usr/lib/freenet/freenet-ext.jar
> 9ac68e0b202f0143869e2c44192e7261 1046561669
> dir /etc
> obj /etc/freenet.conf c97270d05a0ba1d999e58ffdca708fa0 1046561669
> dir /etc/init.d
> obj /etc/init.d/freenet 24f25cc59216bf29f6312ecc48491c04 1046561669
>
>
>
> As you can see, there is no difference in the file lists between config
> files and other files. Gentoo uses CONFIG_PROTECT and CONFIG_PROTECT_MASK
> for that, in make.globals and that can be overrided in make.conf
>
> CONFIG_PROTECT="/etc /var/qmail/control /usr/share/config
> /usr/kde/2/share/config /usr/kde/3/share/config"
> CONFIG_PROTECT_MASK="/etc/gconf"
>
>
>
> Cedric
>
> Le 22 Mars 2003 10:52, vous avez écrit :
> > On Thu, 20 Mar 2003, Jonathan Sambrook wrote:
> > > Is there a Gentoo package maintainer (or is that portage maintainer?)
> > > for vserver?
> > >
> > > <fireresist>I don't know if it's just me, but I perceive an
> > > increase in Gentoo users demanding that the rest of the world support
> > > 'their' distro which seems to be a horse/cart ordering
> > > issue.</fireresist>
> >
> > Hmm. It seems to me that the number of gentoo users is growing rapidly,
> > period. I know within my company that gentoo is becoming more popular.
> >
> > To me a marriage of vserver and gentoo is a natural. After all, if
> > you're running multiple virtual machines on a system, wouldn't it make
> > sense for all of the software to be optimized for the hardware platform?
> > That way you'd make the most efficient use of the hardware. It makes
> > more sense to me than several virtual servers running relatively
> > inefficient Pentium (or i386) code on a modern processor...
> >
> > I wouldn't mind creating an ebuild for vserver, but I have to learn how
> > to create an ebuild first. :-) I'll start looking into it this week.
> > Maybe I'll figure it out, or maybe someone will beat me to it, but I will
> > give it a go.
> >
> > -John