Hi guys, I talked with my friend Zac Medico and your @system is mostly here :
/usr/portage/profiles/base
Have fun :P
From: d2_rac...@hotmail.com
To: zmed...@gentoo.org
Subject: FW: [gentoo-amd64] Where is '@system'?
Date: Fri, 5 Mar 2010 02:22:32 +0000
Hi Zac, can you reply to the gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org and close that
thread :P
Thanks
Salut
alp
> Date: Thu, 4 Mar 2010 17:44:36 -0800
> Subject: Re: [gentoo-amd64] Where is '@system'?
> From: markkne...@gmail.com
> To: gentoo-amd64@lists.gentoo.org
>
> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 3:23 PM, Paul Hartman
> <paul.hartman+gen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 4:23 PM, Mark Knecht <markkne...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 11:13 AM, Paul Hartman
> >> <paul.hartman+gen...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>> On Thu, Mar 4, 2010 at 12:22 PM, Mark Knecht <markkne...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>> I would like emerge -epv @system to be a fairly contained set of
> >>>> packages. (If possible like it was when I first built the system a
> >>>> mere 5 weeks ago...) It seems out of control on my system these days
> >>>> as it wants to emerge 242 packages. One major contributor is not using
> >>>> a global -cups use flag in make.conf which would reduce it to 178.
> >>>> That was added to figure out why Gnome didn't see Sups printers at
> >>>> all. Sure, I would then have to turn on cups for certain packages but
> >>>> that's OK with me. However I still see cairo, icedtea-bin, virtual
> >>>> java stuff, alsa-libs, and a bunch of x11-proto files so it doesn't
> >>>> feel like @system stuff to me
> >>>>
> >>>> 1) Where is the 'system' or '@system' specification on my machine?
> >>>>
> >>>> 2) If you folks run emerge -epv @system then how machine packages do you
> >>>> see?
> >>>
> >>> I believe it all depends on the profile you're using. If you're using
> >>> a desktop profile maybe that's why it's calling in GUI toolkits and
> >>> stuff...
> >>>
> >>
> >> Thanks Paul. I hadn't thought of that and I think you're correct. I
> >> played a bit with changing profiles and then looking at what emerge
> >> -epv @system would or would not do. It's clearly related.
> >>
> >> In the end I wonder if this is a lost cause? If the packages I run
> >> really require these flags then they are all going to get built the
> >> same way. I'd prefer that @system was simple and that @world showed
> >> how I had changed the system to meet my needs, but I'm not sure it's
> >> worth the effort at this point to get there.
> >
> > Looking in the current desktop profile, it shows this:
> >
> > USE="a52 aac acpi alsa branding cairo cdr dbus dts dvd dvdr eds emboss
> > encode evo fam firefox flac gif gnome gpm gstreamer gtk hal jpeg kde
> > ldap libnotify mad mikmod mng mp3 mp4 mpeg ogg opengl pdf png ppds
> > qt3support qt4 quicktime sdl spell svg thunar tiff truetype vorbis
> > win32codecs unicode usb X x264 xml xulrunner xv xvid"
> >
> > So support for things like gnome, gtk, kde and qt4 are there by
> > default. I guess you could take the above list, put a - in front of
> > the ones you don't think you want and put it in make.conf and see what
> > happens. :)
> >
> >
> Yeah, that's interesting and to some extent anyway probably involved
> with why I'm getting a lot of the package I get. What I'm not
> understanding yet is what packages themselves are in @system. Where do
> those come from? I'm assuming that because of all these flags some
> system packages then require more and more support packages as an
> avalance, but I'm not understanding what list of packages gets the
> whole things started.
>
> @world is /var/lib/portage/world.
>
> @system is ?
>
> Thanks,
> Mark
>
Live connected with Messenger on your phone Learn more.
_________________________________________________________________
IM on the go with Messenger on your phone
http://go.microsoft.com/?linkid=9712960
