On 08/13/18 11:47, james wrote:
> On 08/13/18 11:36, Corentin �Nado� Pazdera wrote:
>> August 13, 2018 4:31 PM, "james" <gar...@verizon.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Any hints on a systematic by system parsing this sort of minimized-flag
>>> data :
>>>
>>> [12] default/linux/amd64/17.0 (stable) *
>>>
>>> would be keenly appreciated. "eselect profile list" is great. but
>>> I need it per many different architectures and do not have one
>>> of each of the systems I need to experiment on. How are those flag_sets
>>> discovered in some sort of systematic approach?
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I don't know if this will be of any help but I made a script [1] recently to
>> analyze the
>> inheritance of system set.
>> It may have a few bugs I did that for learning the inner workings of
>> profiles mainly.
>> It should'nt need much work to make it print USE flags details
>>
>> [1] https://gist.github.com/nado/44b392b50c0b71a7e22b98d6909bfa72
>>
>> Best regards,
>> --
>> Corentin �Nado� Pazdera
>>
>>
>
>
> Hey thanks,
>
> I'm testing now an it has given me a few ideas to extend the
> capabilities....
>
>
> James
>
Here's what I got running your script::
/etc # /root/profile-explorer.sh
--- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages:
/usr/portage/profiles/base/packages
--- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages:
*>=sys-apps/baselayout-2
--- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages:
*>=sys-apps/findutils-4.4
--- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages:
*>=sys-devel/patch-2.7
--- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages:
/usr/portage/profiles/default/linux/packages
--- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages:
/usr/portage/profiles/base/packages
--- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages:
*>=sys-apps/baselayout-2
--- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages:
*>=sys-apps/findutils-4.4
--- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages:
*>=sys-devel/patch-2.7
--- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages:
/usr/portage/profiles/default/linux/packages
Manually looking a the
less /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages:
/usr/portage/profiles/base/packages
I see:
# Old ICU is unsupported. ICU 58 only remains for 13.0 based profiles.
<dev-libs/icu-59
<dev-libs/icu-layoutex-59
But the system has::
[I] dev-libs/icu .... 60.2
equery uses icu
gives me similar info:
--- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages:
/usr/portage/profiles/base/packages
--- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages:
*>=sys-apps/baselayout-2
--- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages:
*>=sys-apps/findutils-4.4
--- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages:
*>=sys-devel/patch-2.7
--- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages:
/usr/portage/profiles/default/linux/packages
--- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages:
/usr/portage/profiles/base/packages
--- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages:
*>=sys-apps/baselayout-2
--- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages:
*>=sys-apps/findutils-4.4
--- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages:
*>=sys-devel/patch-2.7
--- Invalid atom in /etc/portage/package.use/explored-packages:
/usr/portage/profiles/default/linux/packages
[ Legend : U - final flag setting for installation]
[ : I - package is installed with flag ]
[ Colors : set, unset ]
* Found these USE flags for dev-libs/icu-60.2:
U I
+ + abi_x86_32 : 32-bit (x86) libraries
- - debug : Enable extra debug codepaths, like asserts and extra
output. If
you want to get meaningful backtraces see
https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Project:Quality_Assurance/Backtraces
- - doc : Add extra documentation (API, Javadoc, etc). It is
recommended to
enable per package instead of globally
+ + examples : Install examples, usually source code
- - static-libs : Build static versions of dynamic libraries as well
Which begs the Q1} can I get rid of the flag icu? What are
consequences, as a baseline system flag, of it's removal ?
less /usr/portage/profiles/base/packages
show me more of what the @system set contains. Very interesting and
useful. I'm thinking of aggregation of those listed packages
and some basic (ascii) table form (equery,emerge, eix) parsed listing
of the default and current flag settings. A "verification" tool
if you like. Surely it would help if this info was (is?) more readily
available and organized for folks that need a systematic approach, like
heterogeneous HPC clusters. The tools exist for 'ad-hoc' and one off,
but more of an organized representation at least at the set level.
I feel like there is an existing tool that can yield all of this
information, as it is on a current system. I've read where there are
efforts to clean up the packages and default flags used in @system,
so the bare minimum list per arch/profiles would ultimately be
a useful listing, particular for my HPC. In HPC less is always faster
and better, as it is in security and so many more aspects of CS.
Obviosly, I have a few things to fix on this (fragile) system, but
that'll happen as I'm at the beginning stages of auto_installs of
minimized systems. What are your plans for you little script?
Just to match equery uses <flag> and such?
Here's a cutie:
/usr/portage/profiles/default/linux/amd64/package.use.mask
# Mike Frysinger <vap...@gentoo.org> (08 May 2016)
# This target supports VTV #547040.
>=sys-devel/gcc-4.9 -vtv
# Mike Frysinger <vap...@gentoo.org> (21 Oct 2014)
# This target supports ASAN/etc... #504200.
sys-devel/gcc -sanitize
And where was it that the processor/arch flags are now listed?
tia,
James
cat
