Mailing List Archive

wireless posted on Thu, 31 Oct 2013 13:29:52 -0400 as excerpted:

> I just used the latest version of pentoo-installer.
>
> Quick recon: The only difference is make.conf is in /etc/portage/ ?

AFAIK, that's recommended for gentoo portage now too[1], tho there's
backward compatibility code in place to handle /etc/make.conf as well.

(That's my real reason for response, the below comments simply there
because I already am responding.)

> Anyone thought of just testing the pentoo-installer to install gentoo,
> quick and easy? I just think there should be a basic, easy install for
> gentoo. Pentoo offers that based on hardened (tool-chain and kernel).
>
> If there is a glaring problem with Pentoo, please post or drop me
> private email. The only problem I see is that it does not offer ZFS in
> the menu during installation.

AFAIK once you start shipping binaries (as an installer with that choice
would be doing) you end up in a legal gray area due to Sun-now-Oracle's
refusal to GPL the ZFS code. Some would therefore consider that lack a
feature, not a bug.[3] =:^)

> Another idea: What flags and configs would I have to change, if any,
> to keep the hardened tool-chain and kernel, but otherwise convert the
> Pentoo installation into a Gentoo system ?
>
> Or is Pentoo, just a specific needs gentoo installation?

I'd consider it the latter. It's available as a gentoo overlay[2], at
least, thereby pretty much fitting the definition.

---
[1] The handbook even specifies /etc/portage/make.conf now, see

http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-amd64.xml?part=1&chap=5#doc_chap3

[2] At least, that's what wikipedia claims (keeping in mind
my stated reason for responding, I've no personal knowledge of
pentoo, so...) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentoo

[3] One of the great things about the manual installation method
is that it's so open-ended; the handbooks document reasonable
defaults, but they're just that, reasonable defaults, leaving the
user free to branch out and do their own thing wherever they feel
the want/need, and we even document some of those branches in
separate documentation such as the alternate install guide. As
such, we can avoid the political debates and choices a more
featureful graphical installer could trigger, this being one of them.

Of course unofficial based-on/specific-needs subdistros such as
pentoo can do what they want, independent of gentoo.

So let's just not go into the whole zfs thing further,
and agree to leave it at that. =:^)

--
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman

On 11/01/13 01:42, Duncan wrote:

>> Anyone thought of just testing the pentoo-installer to install gentoo,
>> quick and easy? I just think there should be a basic, easy install for
>> gentoo. Pentoo offers that based on hardened (tool-chain and kernel).
>>
>> If there is a glaring problem with Pentoo, please post or drop me
>> private email. The only problem I see is that it does not offer ZFS in
>> the menu during installation.
>
> AFAIK once you start shipping binaries (as an installer with that choice
> would be doing) you end up in a legal gray area due to Sun-now-Oracle's
> refusal to GPL the ZFS code. Some would therefore consider that lack a
> feature, not a bug.[3] =:^)

This would only be the initial install. Once you issue "emerge --sync"
does it not pull down sources?

And furthermore, it'd be fairly trivial after reboot to have a script
the noob uses, to pull down the full (updated) source packages. Sure
a quick capacity scan would be needed to ensure the disk has room.


>> Or is Pentoo, just a specific needs gentoo installation?
>
> I'd consider it the latter. It's available as a gentoo overlay[2], at
> least, thereby pretty much fitting the definition.

The point is that soon, it will be very easy to install Pentoo. I'm sure
the folks at Pentoo, do not want the masses of Gentoo users at their
doors, so they are probable very receptive to the ideas that after the
initial install, which by the way has folks on a secure path, to
evolve the Gentoo system into what they want it for. This would be
most easy by then pointing the new Gentoo users to wiki pages that
target a few different general use categories like:
workstation (kde)
fast workstation (XFCE)
Web server DNS server firewall

and just specify a few flag changes and a suggested list of packages.


> [2] At least, that's what wikipedia claims (keeping in mind
> my stated reason for responding, I've no personal knowledge of
> pentoo, so...) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pentoo

I just used these:

pentoo-amd64-2013.0_RC1.9.iso

and a Beta version of SystemRescue to clean up grub.

Hell, Somebody smarter that I could easily whip together a wiki page
on this approach. Then refine it over time, before listing it
in the alternative installation methods..............?





>
> [3] One of the great things about the manual installation method
> is that it's so open-ended; the handbooks document reasonable
> defaults, but they're just that, reasonable defaults, leaving the
> user free to branch out and do their own thing wherever they feel
> the want/need, and we even document some of those branches in
> separate documentation such as the alternate install guide. As
> such, we can avoid the political debates and choices a more
> featureful graphical installer could trigger, this being one of them.
>
> Of course unofficial based-on/specific-needs subdistros such as
> pentoo can do what they want, independent of gentoo.
>
> So let's just not go into the whole zfs thing further,
> and agree to leave it at that. =:^)
>

wireless posted on Fri, 01 Nov 2013 08:12:09 -0400 as excerpted:

> On 11/01/13 01:42, Duncan wrote:
>
>> [Wireless posted...]
>>
>>> The only problem I see [with the pentoo installer] is that it
>>> does not offer ZFS in the menu during installation.
>>
>> AFAIK once you start shipping binaries (as an installer with that
>> choice would be doing) you end up in a legal gray area due to
>> Sun-now-Oracle's refusal to GPL the ZFS code. Some would therefore
>> consider that lack a feature, not a bug.[3] =:^)
>
> This would only be the initial install. Once you issue "emerge --sync"
> does it not pull down sources?

But if those sources aren't GPL compatible (and they aren't), at least
with the kernel module zfs, there's still a potential GPL violation if a
binary is distributed. A /user/ is free to do whatever they want to
their own machine, including building/linking/running GPL and GPL
incompatible sources, but once they distribute that binary, they're no
longer just a user and run afoul of the gpl due to that binary
distribution, regardless of whether sources are available for both the GPL
side and the other side, or not.

That in general gentoo only distributes build-scripts which pull down
sources which are then built, NOT executable binaries, generally keeps
gentoo out of legal hot water in a number of areas including both gpl
binary-distribution violations and potential patent issues that the
binary distros have to deal with. But distributing an installer with the
binaries is an exception to the general gentoo rule, since it /does/
involve distributing executable binaries, and as such, there are far more
legal restrictions, both in terms of GPLed binaries, and for anything
(like the various media codecs, tho fortunately they're not normally on a
simple installer, but they COULD be in package disc images!) a patent is
known to cover.

Of course to the best of my knowledge, pentoo is independent of gentoo
and thus we wouldn't be directly affected. Were it to ship zfs in the
installer, the potential gpl violation wouldn't be our legal problem, but
theirs. Still, it's nothing we should be encouraging.

Of course there's also the zfs-fuse project, userspace zfs, that is AFAIK
entirely compatible with the kernel's gpl due to the long accepted
userspace waiver (and I know of no other userspace gpl style problems it
has, AFAIK it's legal worry free, to the extent /any/ software is at
least, in this day of software patents). But AFAIK it's significantly
slower and has other limitations related to the fact that it runs in
userspace.

The more political side is that thru its failure to GPL that code despite
repeated requests, Sun/Oracle has made it *VERY* clear they have no
interest in supporting fully legal Linux use. They'd rather it remain a
legal gray area, thus encouraging at least the corporate types with lots
of money to lose if there's a battle and it goes wrong, to either stay
away from zfs on Linux, or preferably, to choose Solaris instead. And
there could /well/ be such a battle, which could become VERY costly for
those involved regardless of which side "wins". That's one lesson the
formerly Linux friendly Caldera, later evolved into the SCO Group, made
*VERY* clear.

That's why zfs remains such a "third rail" untouchable to many in the
community. Individual users who don't have much to lose and could switch
to something other than zfs reasonably quickly if they had to, can do the
build-your-own that the GPL freely allows as long as you don't
distribute, and that the zfs license either allows or that Oracle
currently tolerates (I'm not sure which) and be fine. But a large
company would be insane to touch zfs on Linux, as would any binary-
distributing entity large enough to get on the legal radar, and that's
apparently /exactly/ how Oracle wants to keep things, so here we are...

--
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman

On 11/01/13 10:01, Duncan wrote:

> But a large
> company would be insane to touch zfs on Linux, as would any binary-
> distributing entity large enough to get on the legal radar, and that's
> apparently /exactly/ how Oracle wants to keep things, so here we are...

GREAT to KNOW! Sure I've read snippets all over the place, but you have
just framed the current state (in truth) as I (many?) have not
comprehended before. So I shall play with ZFS and ext4 for now, waiting
on BTRFS to become more stable; using the pentoo-installer.


Another point of curiousity. If ZFS was forgone, which Pentoo does not
offer in the pentoo-installer, and instead use ext4 for now, what would
be the problems with Pentoo, especially if the install media was to
include the sources (along with the binaries) within the liveDVD iso ?


And I did not intend to infer that Gentoo should do this, just some
users on whatever wiki, to first prove out the concept. That said,
having the wisdom of folks, steeped in these murky issues, does help
others to understand and find work around for the userland folks.


Also, it seems curious that the last liveDVD was built on ZFSOnLinux;
curious to have you clear up that misconception I have on ZFS legalities
related to Gentoo. It's my current favorite liveDVD.

[1] livedvd-x86-amd64-32ul-20121221.iso

James