Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Gentoo goes Binary

gentoo.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

271–280 of 285 posts

Re: Gentoo goes Binary

#271

Post by MrDrMcCoy »

BrandoElFollito wrote: post #267
MrDrMcCoy wrote: post #228

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Now: this was probably not the brightest choice, as this server rund my docker containers and basically nothing more so it should have been Debian(a fire-and-forget OS) I dunno, there's a fair amount to be said for having an up-to-date kernel, systemd, and Docker. :)

It depends on the kind of "up-to-datism", at least for me. Security - yes. Features - for docker yes, the rest not really. The main problem is that if I provide a specific repo for docker (to keep a fresh version) it can request some dependencies and bam! I have a Debian-Turend-Arch system to maintain :)

I mostly included syetemd due to the shiny new feature where you can enable kernel samepage merging for arbitrary applications. Could be very useful for certain use cases.

Re: Gentoo goes Binary

#272

Post by bombcar »

aidenn0 wrote: post #187
bombcar wrote: post #157

Earlier quoted context omitted.

IIRC the cow has been there forever (apparently since 2004) - https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Larry_the_cow I always thought it's head kind of looked like the stylized G logo.

I feel old now, since I was using Gentoo before Larry existed, and Larry has existed "forever."

The years between 1937 and 1980 are the same as 1980 and 2023. :(

Re: Gentoo goes Binary

#273

Post by starttoaster »

gryn wrote: post #256
starttoaster wrote: post #238

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My experience using Arch has very much been "it's just like all the other distros, except now you have at least 4 package managers to go through if you want to install any particular thing and you will almost certainly need to install utilities that convert packages from other package managers over to PKGBUILD." Other than that, it's felt very similar to just using something like Debian. Which is fine, and Debian is…

Your experience sounds weird. Reading it remind me of people who come from programming paradigm X try paradigm Y and only use methods from X only to conclude that Y sucks. Why would you use 4 package managers to do 1 thing ? Most people who use arch use 1 and it does the job. All of them are built around pacman + smth for AUR packages. Personally I use pacui. Why would you convert package from other distro, if anothe…

> Why would you convert package from other distro, if another distro has it then it most certainly exists in the AUR, never once had to touch another distro's packaging.

A lot of software packages I've been using lately don't exist in the AUR. My tastes might be more niche than yours, I don't know.

> Why would you use 4 package managers to do 1 thing ?

Because all the software I'm trying to install has documentation like "install with pacman" or "install with pamac" or "install with yay" or "install from source" or "install from AUR" or... I think you get where this is going.

> Your experience sounds weird. Reading it remind me of people who come from programming paradigm X try paradigm Y and only use methods from X only to conclude that Y sucks.

Reading your rebuttal to my experience reminds me of people who answer questions on Stackoverflow like, "why would you do it this way? Your question isn't valid, your question _should have been_..." That is to say, rather than attempt to understand where I'm coming from, you thought to overwrite my experience with your own, as if yours is the truer experience to be had. My time using Arch and Arch-variant distros led me to having a seemingly fragmented experience over where to find software. That's got nothing to do with X being better than Y, it has more to do with X being mostly one or two overall places to find software, and Y being fragmented between 4-5 + conversions between apt/yum packages and PKGBUILD scripts. I'm not saying Y is inherently worse, I'm saying it's a fragmented and confusing user experience, in my humble opinion. My main dev machine still runs Manjaro because I've come to enjoy its opinionated handling of Arch, though if I were to re-image that computer I'd probably go back to either Fedora or Ubuntu.

> but I personally had much less headaches with it than I had with Ubuntu,fedora,debian, and CentOS.

Personally, I'm fine with using Ubuntu, Fedora, Debian, or even Arch. I'm not saying any one of them are bad or worse than the other. I'm just saying that, to me, Arch came with some additional challenges that I don't experience from other distros, mostly revolving around how software packages are found and installed.

Re: Gentoo goes Binary

#274

Post by vitarnixofntrnt »

cogman10 wrote: post #202
pantantrant wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't install Gentoo, specifically, the part where I have to install a BIOS or UEFI grub2 bootloader. No I did not use a musl and / or clang profile. With this being my first impression, unless Gentoo or a downstream fork comes with a installer, I won't consider it. I'm going to install Solus OS / Solus Linux soon, had a good first impression with it's package manager, which claims to be reproducible but not like n…

What part is failing? Do you see the grub bootloader or is it failing before that? If you do systemd (which is what I'm using), then you might look at systemd.boot for UEFI. That's currently what I'm using. I ask, because one issue I ran into was messing up the kernel config. Pulling the livecd config in and using that as the base config worked for me.

[dead]

Re: Gentoo goes Binary

#275

Post by pantantrant »

MrDrMcCoy wrote: post #231
pantantrant wrote: post #201

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I can't install Gentoo, specifically, the part where I have to install a BIOS or UEFI grub2 bootloader. No I did not use a musl and / or clang profile. With this being my first impression, unless Gentoo or a downstream fork comes with a installer, I won't consider it. I'm going to install Solus OS / Solus Linux soon, had a good first impression with it's package manager, which claims to be reproducible but not like n…

I have a work laptop that's pretty cursed when it comes to booting anything that isn't Windows or Fedora. I only recently got Arch to boot, and then only by using UKI and skipping the bootloader by directly registering it in UEFI. Maybe Gentoo has instructions for doing the same thing? I think it's actually simpler this way, it's just far less obvious and very new.

Gentoo did have a GUI installer in the past, what year was it?

Re: Gentoo goes Binary

#276

Post by gryn »

starttoaster wrote: post #273
gryn wrote: post #256

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your experience sounds weird. Reading it remind me of people who come from programming paradigm X try paradigm Y and only use methods from X only to conclude that Y sucks. Why would you use 4 package managers to do 1 thing ? Most people who use arch use 1 and it does the job. All of them are built around pacman + smth for AUR packages. Personally I use pacui. Why would you convert package from other distro, if anothe…

> Why would you convert package from other distro, if another distro has it then it most certainly exists in the AUR, never once had to touch another distro's packaging. A lot of software packages I've been using lately don't exist in the AUR. My tastes might be more niche than yours, I don't know. > Why would you use 4 package managers to do 1 thing ? Because all the software I'm trying to install has documentation…

My bad if my response came as a rebuttal, it was more of a confusion of the circumstances that led you to do things the way you did. Was it just a lack of knowledge about arch or some esoteric setup I've never seen.

I understand that a newcomer at the beginning can be confused about the relationship between pacman, pamac, AUR, yay, etc

similar cli programs exist in other distros though are not as encouraged.

Re: Gentoo goes Binary

#277

Post by starttoaster »

gryn wrote: post #276
starttoaster wrote: post #273

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why would you convert package from other distro, if another distro has it then it most certainly exists in the AUR, never once had to touch another distro's packaging. A lot of software packages I've been using lately don't exist in the AUR. My tastes might be more niche than yours, I don't know. > Why would you use 4 package managers to do 1 thing ? Because all the software I'm trying to install has documentation…

My bad if my response came as a rebuttal, it was more of a confusion of the circumstances that led you to do things the way you did. Was it just a lack of knowledge about arch or some esoteric setup I've never seen. I understand that a newcomer at the beginning can be confused about the relationship between pacman, pamac, AUR, yay, etc similar cli programs exist in other distros though are not as encouraged.

> My bad if my response came as a rebuttal

That is how I read it, but it's all good. Sorry for misreading your tone.

> I understand that a newcomer at the beginning can be confused about the relationship between pacman, pamac, AUR, yay, etc

Perhaps that's the source of my confusion. So with:

Red Hat-like distros the tools are usually dnf or yum, which are evolutions over rpm.

Debian-like distros the tools are usually apt or apt-get (which are more or less the exact same thing), which are evolutions over dpkg.

With Arch, I kind of assumed that pamac and pacman are similar things, no idea if yay is related to anything else though. And I think pamac actually can install things from the AUR. My confusion definitely stems from loading up documentation from every different piece of software I tend to install, and each one of them listing a different utility for installing their package. If these are all the same thing with different UIs, installing packages from the same repositories, then that's definitely where I got lost.

And then I'd often be further annoyed to find out that the software vendor doesn't have a package for Arch, and nobody put one in the AUR yet, so I'd take the deb pkg and run it through debtap to get a PKGBUILD script. Doing which has netted me varied results.

Re: Gentoo goes Binary

#278

Post by MrDrMcCoy »

pantantrant wrote: post #275
MrDrMcCoy wrote: post #231

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a work laptop that's pretty cursed when it comes to booting anything that isn't Windows or Fedora. I only recently got Arch to boot, and then only by using UKI and skipping the bootloader by directly registering it in UEFI. Maybe Gentoo has instructions for doing the same thing? I think it's actually simpler this way, it's just far less obvious and very new.

Gentoo did have a GUI installer in the past, what year was it?

I only ever recall Sabayon Linux having a graphical installer and being Gentoo under the hood. Was there an installer for vanilla Gentoo?

Re: Gentoo goes Binary

#279

Post by 1vuio0pswjnm7 »

connorgutman wrote: post #239
1vuio0pswjnm7 wrote: post #225

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Personally, I enjoy compiling everything from source and the flexibility that comes with it." Is this referring only to ports (Portage) or does this mean enjoy compiling kernel and userland.

Depends upon the device. I typically opt for compiling the Linux kernel myself but certain devices (like my Lenovo x60s) would absolutely melt if I compiled it from scratch. Thankfully, Gentoo offers gentoo-kernel-bin. Meanwhile my brand new GPD Win 4 Pro has a stupid nvme that requires 6.6.5+ to boot making compiling the only option (until a couple weeks ago at least).

Compiling a Linux kernel is too much for an x60. Certainly would not be the case with compiling a NetBSD kernel.

Is this even after disabling drivers and other code that is not needed for the x60.

Post reply on HN