On Sat, May 14, 2022 at 10:22 PM Matías Fonzo <[email protected]> wrote: > > El 2022-05-14 17:05, Matías Fonzo escribió: > > El 2022-05-14 10:05, DustDFG escribió: > >> On Sat, May 14, 2022 at 6:08 AM DustDFG <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 10:18 PM Matias Fonzo <[email protected]> > >>> wrote: > >>> > > >>> > El 2022-05-13 13:51, DustDFG escribió: > >>> > > >>> I also think that we can make an exception for kernel category and > >>> not > >>> to change it. So we will get essential category that contains > >>> everything for the minimal system except the kernel. It is obvious > >>> that system needs kernel for running so it isn't so necessary to > >>> point > >>> out it. In this case, hypothetical essential.order file will process > >>> only packages from these two categories and it looks logical. What do > >>> you think about it? What do you like more (subcategory or exception > >>> for kernel category or maybe something else)? > > > > We have to try to keep things simple, this is also subject to how you > look at it. > > The discussion has two aspects, the build side and the part of the > already running system, which delivers the packages, let's call it the > binary side. > > If I understand correctly what you want or propose to offer from the > build side is the essential or minimum for the system to run, instead of > having to build all or the rest of the series. This I assume would be > for the purpose of wanting to have a minimal system for the purpose of > saving time or resources on the build side. Here we are pointedly > referring to the final build of the system from within the temporary > system. > > If you create a new series called e.g. "00-essential.order" where you > have the essential packages annotated, you must have add or annotate the > recipes that belong to the build software (musl, binutils, gcc, ...), as > the system has to be adjusted to its final paths. By this is meant > assuming that the minimal system is built in its entirety, this leaves > the build packages installed as well. In this whole stage of building > the "essential" series from this point on, it translates into time, > build time to build and install the packages that build software, plus > the packages required to run the system. While it is true that you can > later remove the build packages to leave only what is required, it is > time consuming to want to build it. > > On the other hand, it would be smarter to take advantage of what we > already have, and that is that the build tools are built at an early > stage (stage 0), and if there is a new stage, where you aim for a small > system as much as possible, where you offer the possibility to install > binary packages, then I think that would be better. It saves resources > and time, specifically it saves this: > > ./bootstrap -s0 && ./bootstrap -s1 && ./enter-chroot && qi build > order /usr/src/qi/recipes/00-essential.order | qi build -S -p -i - 2>&1 > | tee /essential-log.txt > > When it could be done as: > > ./bootstrap -s0 && ./bootstrap -sM > > By the way, the "./bootstrap -s0" instruction can be avoided, if you > unpack a flavour offered by Darkcrusade, by unpacking one of the > (pre-made) cross-compilers under the "OUTPUT.bootstrap" directory. > > Then, the "M" stage which is a challenge, a challenge in the sense that > it contains only what is necessary for system execution, for example: > > M/01-kernel > M/02-musl > M/03-busybox > M/04-sysvinit > M/05-bootscripts > M/06-perl (perl-cross here) > M/07-graft > M/08-lzlib > M/09-tarlz > M/10-plzip > M/11-qi > M/12-qire (and its dependencies for remote package installation) > > The challenge is also to have the minimum as well as the "just enough" > configurations of what the system needs, which is intended to leave it > running so that it can be extended, through the binary packages > provided. > > (I mention or write all this for the record, in case it is done > tomorrow). > > Now, from the binary side, and related to the build, if we mark those > essential packages (not those essential to build) but those essential > for the execution of the system, then we could offer the installation of > the "minimal" system from the dragora-installer... > >
Hello Matias! The stage 1 from this commit [1] can be a base for minimal system and temporary system at the same time. What do you think about it? [1] https://notabug.org/dustdfg/dragora/commit/bd11424884cb2337294b8a42e4d4e1e2443a9845
