On Tue, 2022-02-08 at 15:57 +0100, Raphael Hertzog wrote:
> We should trim the base system to be more container friendly
IIRC Helmut Grohne etc have already been working on this for years:
https://wiki.debian.org/Proposals/EssentialOnDiet
--
bye,
pabs
https://wiki.debian.org/PaulW
ail, but it would be interesting to file them as new issues in
> the "grow-your-ideas" project and then reply here pointing to your new
> issue:
I filed https://salsa.debian.org/debian/grow-your-ideas/-/issues/20 which
states:
We should trim the base system to be more container
Hi,
Frans Pop schrieb:
> Right, and existing tools depend on the fact that it has always been tagged
> Build-Essential. You can argue about changing that, but if you do you will
> also need to agree on a transition period.
debootstrap has been fixed and that is why I am closing this bug report
On Sunday 27 December 2009, Kurt Roeckx wrote:
> On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 01:39:28PM +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
> > From that perspective apt should be tagged Build-Essential. Simply
> > because without apt you don't have a working build system.
>
> apt is not and never was needed to build a package an
On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 01:39:28PM +0100, Frans Pop wrote:
> Torsten Werner wrote:
> > The Build-Essential: yes field has been updated 2 months ago to better
> > match the declared Depends in the package build-essential as requested
> > in bug #548801.
>
> It seems there is a misunderstanding abou
re required to set up a working base system for
a buildd.
From that perspective apt should be tagged Build-Essential. Simply because
without apt you don't have a working build system.
And build-essential should of course also be tagged, but IMO *not* any
packages on which build-essential alrea
Julien Cristau schrieb:
> -- Daniel Schepler Wed, 10 Mar 2004 02:29:27 -0800
>
> I'm not sure how that can qualify as "new".
Compared to some code in dak it is coming from the future. ;-)
The Build-Essential: yes field has been updated 2 months ago to better
match the declared Depends in the
On Sun, Dec 27, 2009 at 00:20:49 +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
> Julien Cristau wrote:
> > Are you saying people didn't check debootstrap before breaking it?
>
> AFAIK it was checked with running debootstrap which still works as
> expected except for the new variants...
>
Are you kidding me?
debootst
On 2009-12-26, Luk Claes wrote:
> Julien Cristau wrote:
>> On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 23:43:44 +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
>>> Junichi Uekawa wrote:
It seems like apt is not installed with debootstrap anymore.
And it seems to be staying like this.
I'm not sure when this happened, but apt
Julien Cristau wrote:
> On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 23:43:44 +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
>
>> Junichi Uekawa wrote:
>>> It seems like apt is not installed with debootstrap anymore.
>>> And it seems to be staying like this.
>>>
>>> I'm not sure when this happened, but apt used to be
>>> build-essential=y
On Sat, Dec 26, 2009 at 23:43:44 +0100, Luk Claes wrote:
> Junichi Uekawa wrote:
> >
> > It seems like apt is not installed with debootstrap anymore.
> > And it seems to be staying like this.
> >
> > I'm not sure when this happened, but apt used to be
> > build-essential=yes but now it's not.
s was still in use?
It also looks very strange to me that apt would be part of the build
essential set as it is not essential nor needed for building packages.
The mention of base system in the below log is also suboptimal as that
has a specified meaning which is based on the priority of the packa
uilder
> > > > Version: 0.60
> > > > Severity: grave
> > > >
> > > > I guess apt is missing ...
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > sudo cowbuilder --create
> > > >
> > [...]
> > > > I: Configuring libtimedate-perl..
; Severity: grave
> > >
> > > I guess apt is missing ...
> > >
> > >
> > > sudo cowbuilder --create
> > >
> [...]
> > > I: Configuring libtimedate-perl...
> > > I: Configuring dpkg-dev...
> > > I: Configuring bu
Your message dated Fri, 5 Sep 2008 00:58:48 +0200
with message-id <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
and subject line security is a process, not a product
has caused the Debian Bug report #81118,
regarding High security base system (or separate add-on package)
to be marked as done.
This means that you
ortant packages are part of the base system.
For a normal install, packages with Priority standard will be installed as
well as the "Standard system" task is selected by default. The "Standard
system" task is somewhat different from other tasks as it is based on the
priori
On Tue, 15 May 2007 08:19:50 +0200, sean finney wrote:
> On Mon, 2007-05-14 at 22:33 -0700, Carlos Ramirez wrote:
>> Is a file, webpage or command that can provide a list of packages that
>> are part of the Debian base system? I tried searching in various places
>> without m
On Tuesday 15 May 2007 07:33, Carlos Ramirez wrote:
> Is a file, webpage or command that can provide a list of packages that
> are part of the Debian base system? I tried searching in various places
> without much luck. Any help in the right direct is appreciated.
You could use de
2007-05-14 at 22:33 -0700, Carlos Ramirez wrote:
Is a file, webpage or command that can provide a list of packages that
are part of the Debian base system? I tried searching in various places
without much luck. Any help in the right direct is appreciated.
the easiest way:
apt-get instal
hi carlos,
On Mon, 2007-05-14 at 22:33 -0700, Carlos Ramirez wrote:
> Is a file, webpage or command that can provide a list of packages that
> are part of the Debian base system? I tried searching in various places
> without much luck. Any help in the right direct is appreciated.
th
Is a file, webpage or command that can provide a list of packages that
are part of the Debian base system? I tried searching in various places
without much luck. Any help in the right direct is appreciated.
Thanks,
-Carlos
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of
#include
* Riku Voipio [Wed, Jul 26 2006, 12:18:54PM]:
> On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 06:10:23PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> > I disagree. You compare a 11kB utility (sysctl) with a new 132kB
> > package.
>
> You are comparing two completly different things. If we are to
> actually compare the size o
On Tue, Jul 25, 2006 at 06:10:23PM +0200, Eduard Bloch wrote:
> I disagree. You compare a 11kB utility (sysctl) with a new 132kB
> package.
You are comparing two completly different things. If we are to
actually compare the size of tools actually *needed*:
-rwxr-xr-x 1 root root 1554 2006-05-12 1
On Jul 25, Otavio Salvador <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > No, wishing a feature-complete set of configuration file for aestethical
> > reasons is not enough to move more stuff to base.
> So let's remove setctl from base.
There is no such package. But if you think that some of the packages
currentl
Em Ter, 2006-07-25 às 02:04 +0200, Frans Pop escreveu:
> My main rationale is that its init script offers offers a fairly clean and
> obvious way for users to set values in /sys at boot time. (Without the
> need for them to hack a local init script.)
It's far away from actually being installed b
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Marco d'Itri) writes:
> On Jul 25, Otavio Salvador <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I agree that we already have equivalent functionality for /proc values
>> so makes sense to have it in too.
> No, wishing a feature-complete set of configuration file for aestethical
> reasons is
#include
* Otavio Salvador [Tue, Jul 25 2006, 02:23:16PM]:
> Well then we might work reducing the code size but at least am I
> talking about functionality and that's important in my POV.
Important for whom exactly? I do not have this package installed here
and I never missed it. Now I have inst
On Jul 25, Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Why do you choose to completely ignore the option (that was mentioned at
> least twice) to move the init script part to a separate or existing base
> package? That would make the addition to base only a few KB.
*If* this really added only a few K
On Tuesday 25 July 2006 21:16, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> echo looks clean and obvious to me as well, and does not require 180 KB
> of new packages.
Why do you choose to completely ignore the option (that was mentioned at
least twice) to move the init script part to a separate or existing base
packag
On Jul 25, Otavio Salvador <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I agree that we already have equivalent functionality for /proc values
> so makes sense to have it in too.
No, wishing a feature-complete set of configuration file for aestethical
reasons is not enough to move more stuff to base.
--
ciao,
M
On Jul 25, Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My main rationale is that its init script offers offers a fairly clean and
> obvious way for users to set values in /sys at boot time. (Without the
> need for them to hack a local init script.)
echo looks clean and obvious to me as well, and does
Eduard Bloch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> #include
> * Otavio Salvador [Mon, Jul 24 2006, 09:26:58PM]:
>
>> > IMO it is much easier to find functionality like this if it is already
>> > present on the system than if you have to search for it. And it seems to
>> > me basic enough that it warran
#include
* Otavio Salvador [Mon, Jul 24 2006, 09:26:58PM]:
> > IMO it is much easier to find functionality like this if it is already
> > present on the system than if you have to search for it. And it seems to
> > me basic enough that it warrants inclusion in base, especially as
> > equivalen
Frans Pop <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Tuesday 25 July 2006 01:42, Marco d'Itri wrote:
>> Which packages actually use it, and why?
>> What can it do that "echo $VALUE > /sys$DEVPATH/attribute" and similar
>> commands cannot do?
>>
>> What is the point of having an abstraction layer for a publ
On Tuesday 25 July 2006 01:42, Marco d'Itri wrote:
> Which packages actually use it, and why?
> What can it do that "echo $VALUE > /sys$DEVPATH/attribute" and similar
> commands cannot do?
>
> What is the point of having an abstraction layer for a published and
> already widely used API?
>
> I ob
Package: base
Severity: wishlist
As 2.6 will be the default kernel for Etch and /sys is playing an
increasingly important role in system configuration, I was wondering if
it does not make sense to add sysfsutils to base and thus install it by
default on new systems.
It can be used for example to
On 5/30/06, Chris Boot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Of course, but I'm just talking about getting a basic environment set
up from scratch. I realise slind removes the need for that now, but...
I'm not insisting on you using slind, I just want to convince people
to contribute to it. :)
--
I am fr
On 5/30/06, Chris Boot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Just make a list of everything you have installed and rebuild each
package one-by-one until you've covered everything. I can't see where
the problem is.
In the real world (tm) building things by hand is not acceptable because of
a) complicated bu
On 5/30/06, Daniel Ruoso <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
What I do think it would be really nice is to have a "contrib-builds"
SLIND repository (like backports do). This would make things easier for
sharing this effort.
Will be there Real Soon Now (tm). Hardware is already at the desk, I
just need t
On 5/30/06, Chris Boot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 29 May 2006, at 23:53, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
Yes, I can see that could be handy. I'm guessing SLIND is based on
woody?
No, it is based on testing/unstable. Host part is mostly sarge (it was
in the 0.1 prerelease, now most of it is sid).
Well i
On 30 May 2006, at 09:12, Alexander Shishkin wrote:
On 5/30/06, Chris Boot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Just make a list of everything you have installed and rebuild each
package one-by-one until you've covered everything. I can't see where
the problem is.
In the real world (tm) building things
On 30 May 2006, at 08:53, Alexander Shishkin wrote:
On 5/30/06, Chris Boot <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 29 May 2006, at 23:53, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
Yes, I can see that could be handy. I'm guessing SLIND is based on
woody?
No, it is based on testing/unstable. Host part is mostly sarge (it was
l the arch-independent
packages help a lot too.
In fact, I want it to work as a native debian system. This way,
buildroot causes a lot of problems (I think that's the motivation
behind
SLIND). And they already have a binary base system which is a hell lot
of work already done... Mixing this
Em Seg, 2006-05-29 às 23:59 +0100, Steve Kemp escreveu:
> On Mon, May 29, 2006 at 07:53:02PM -0300, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
> > In fact, I want it to work as a native debian system. This way,
> > buildroot causes a lot of problems
> Isn't this what 'apt-build' can be used for?
> That allows you to reb
On Mon, May 29, 2006 at 07:53:02PM -0300, Daniel Ruoso wrote:
> In fact, I want it to work as a native debian system. This way,
> buildroot causes a lot of problems
Isn't this what 'apt-build' can be used for?
http://julien.danjou.info/article-apt-build.html
That allows you to rebuild
ackages help a lot too.
In fact, I want it to work as a native debian system. This way,
buildroot causes a lot of problems (I think that's the motivation behind
SLIND). And they already have a binary base system which is a hell lot
of work already done... Mixing this with dpkg-cross, well..
deed, I've been using a buildroot-built
system for mine so it was difficult getting dpkg built in the first
place, but I've got it mostly all going. All the arch-independent
packages help a lot too.
Can anybody give me a helping hand in building a basic base-system
that I can
use to
environments.
This need is starting to become more and more evident... I'm working on
this also, using SLIND as toolchain and initial bootstrap (which,
actually, is saving the day).
> Can anybody give me a helping hand in building a basic base-system that I can
> use to recompile oth
Hi all,
I'm starting work again on a thinned-down version of Debian I call PicoDebian.
The idea of this new version is to replace glibc with uClibc, and generally slim
down various packages to fit nicely in confined environments.
I've managed to build several of the base-syste
[First off, please follow debian list policy and refrain from Cc:'ing
me. Secondly, this discussion is more appropriate for -user, not
-devel. MFT set appropriately.]
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005, Philipp Hug wrote:
> > What the hell is a "base installation"?
>
> The list of packages that gets installed
> What the hell is a "base installation"?
The list of packages that gets installed by d-i/debootstrap...
> Install whatever you want. You're free to install nullmailer, ssmtp,
> etc.
>
I know I can replace it with whatever I want, that's not the point.
I'm just wondering if it makes sense to have
Quoting Don Armstrong ([EMAIL PROTECTED]):
> On Thu, 17 Feb 2005, Philipp Hug wrote:
> > Is it really necessary to have a full blown MTA in the base installation?
>
> What the hell is a "base installation"?
...what you get when installing from scratch and choose no task in
tasksel.
You then end
On Thu, 17 Feb 2005, Philipp Hug wrote:
> Is it really necessary to have a full blown MTA in the base installation?
What the hell is a "base installation"?
> Wouldn't it make more sense to just install a simple store-and-forward proxy
> (e.g nullmailer)?
> Or are there other alternatives that ju
* Philipp Hug ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> Is it really necessary to have a full blown MTA in the base installation?
> Wouldn't it make more sense to just install a simple store-and-forward proxy
> (e.g nullmailer)?
> Or are there other alternatives that just provide a sendmail wrapper?
Well, wou
Is it really necessary to have a full blown MTA in the base installation?
Wouldn't it make more sense to just install a simple store-and-forward proxy
(e.g nullmailer)?
Or are there other alternatives that just provide a sendmail wrapper?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a sub
On Thu, Jun 18, 1998 at 03:26:11PM +0100, Philip Hands wrote:
> You might want to look at the Linux Router Project:
>
> http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/
>
> which is building a Debian-ish single floppy router.
>
> Also, it's worth noting that you can format 3.5'' floppies to contain up t
You might want to look at the Linux Router Project:
http://www.psychosis.com/linux-router/
which is building a Debian-ish single floppy router.
Also, it's worth noting that you can format 3.5'' floppies to contain up to
about 2MB, by using bizarre sectors/track settings. This is also mention
try for "xdm-server" (or something)
> which is looked up while your X-terminal boots. This does seem pointless to
> me, but who's counting.
>
no comment :)
> > > I've done an X terminal on a single 1.44 MB floppy. Almost all of the
> > > stuff
> &g
looked up while your X-terminal boots. This does seem pointless to
me, but who's counting.
> > I've done an X terminal on a single 1.44 MB floppy. Almost all of the stuff
> > on the base system is unnecessary: what you really need is a simple init
> > system (calling
On Wed, Jun 17, 1998 at 02:08:05PM -0400, Avery Pennarun wrote:
> On Tue, Jun 16, 1998 at 11:49:25PM -0400, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > I also found out that I hafta do a chroot . bash --login
> > once to get it to configure the base system (ie keymap stuff)
>
to get it to configure the base system (ie keymap stuff)
You could copy /etc/resolv.conf and other config files out of the server's
/etc directory. Most of that should be correct (though you'll have to do
something special for 'nameserver 127.0.0.1' obviously).
I've done an
hamm disks-i386 into it.
This gives me a nice base system to start with...I have some
problems though.
Ok I found out there is no resolv.conf (duh I know..that gets created by
a script when I configure the network...which obviously never happens)
I also found out that I hafta do a chroot . bash
On Tue, May 05, 1998 at 11:25:40AM -0500, Rob Browning wrote:
> Enrique Zanardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> > I've been testing some simple ftp clients and qftp looks like the best
> > option, with cftp going second on the list. If you have any comments or
> > suggestions, now is the time, so
Enrique Zanardi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> I've been testing some simple ftp clients and qftp looks like the best
> option, with cftp going second on the list. If you have any comments or
> suggestions, now is the time, so let's hear those horror/love stories
> about one or the other.
My favo
On Tue, 28 Apr 1998 20:15:16 +0100, I wrote:
> We have a little conflict here:
>
> - The netbase maintainer says telnet should stay in netstd.
>
> - I don't want to put the whole netstd (~1.2MB uncompressed) into the
> base system. (That would be one base floppy mor
gt; To: debian-devel@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Re: netstd tools in the base system (was Re: What to do
> with /bin/perl symlink?)
>
> On Tue, Apr 28, 1998 at 07:00:48PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > > What if the person does not want to use dselect? Many people (not
> me)
On Tue, Apr 28, 1998 at 07:00:48PM -0600, Jason Gunthorpe wrote:
> > What if the person does not want to use dselect? Many people (not me)
> > prefer
> > to download packages themselves, and dpkg -i them. Now that ftp is
> > removed,
> > they would either have to download netstd using somethi
On Tue, 28 Apr 1998, Igor Grobman wrote:
> What if the person does not want to use dselect? Many people (not me) prefer
> to download packages themselves, and dpkg -i them. Now that ftp is removed,
> they would either have to download netstd using something other than linux,
> or
> use dsel
On Apr 28, Alex Yukhimets wrote:
> > - Remove usr/bin/ftp and usr/bin/telnet from the base system.
>
> Oh, no!
> Please don't remove them.
> They are very convenient and necessary tools when you are installing on some
> local network and to setup proper routing yo
On Tue, Apr 28, 1998 at 10:36:34AM -0400, Alex Yukhimets wrote:
> > - Remove usr/bin/ftp and usr/bin/telnet from the base system.
>
> Oh, no!
> Please don't remove them.
> They are very convenient and necessary tools when you are installing on some
> local network and t
Alex Yukhimets wrote:
> > - Remove usr/bin/ftp and usr/bin/telnet from the base system.
>
> Oh, no!
> Please don't remove them.
> They are very convenient and necessary tools when you are installing on some
> local network and to setup proper routing you need to chek
> On Tue, Apr 28, 1998 at 06:18:13PM +1000, Aaron Howell wrote:
> > On Tue, Apr 28, 1998 at 09:11:45AM +0100, Enrique Zanardi wrote:
> > > Then we have two options:
> > >
> > > - Remove usr/bin/ftp and usr/bin/telnet from the base system.
> > > -
> - Remove usr/bin/ftp and usr/bin/telnet from the base system.
Oh, no!
Please don't remove them.
They are very convenient and necessary tools when you are installing on some
local network and to setup proper routing you need to chek other local
machines and download some configurati
On Tue, Apr 28, 1998 at 06:18:13PM +1000, Aaron Howell wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 28, 1998 at 09:11:45AM +0100, Enrique Zanardi wrote:
> > Then we have two options:
> >
> > - Remove usr/bin/ftp and usr/bin/telnet from the base system.
> > - Create a netstd-base package wi
On Tue, Apr 28, 1998 at 09:11:45AM +0100, Enrique Zanardi wrote:
> Then we have two options:
>
> - Remove usr/bin/ftp and usr/bin/telnet from the base system.
> - Create a netstd-base package with those tools.
>
> If nobody objects, I will choose the first option for the ne
e:
> > >
> > > > Currently the base system comes with that symlink, but I plan to remove
> > > > it for the next boot-floppies release. Objections?
> > >
> > > None. Just a question: Are there more files (still) in the
> > > base system
I just installed the base system from the new diskette set of
yesterday. I noticed that the audio devices files are still missing,
and that /usr/lib/zoneinfo is still mode 777. The former probably
isn't that important (though it would be a good idea to create them
by default, to avoi
77 matches
Mail list logo
