Gentoo Binary Distrobution???

cchapman · Guru Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Posts: 440 Location: Fremont, NE

Just a stupid idea.. but for Gentoo to get into the mainstream(if they wanted to) should come out with a binary only distro called I dont know
still utilizing emerge.
I love the idea of source based distro for my home computer but this just dont fly for the corporate world...

Gentoo Enterprise Linux AS
Gentoo Enterprise Linux ES
Gentoo Enterprise Linux WS

Sorry for the sappy naming convention : - )

Build the binaries on non agressive Compiler flags.
Screw the bluecurve interface and make a Gentoo specific Gnome interface
Build it to kick Redhat's #ss

Just my $.02 worth...

christsong84 · Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2003 5:49 pm Post subject:

Name Ideas...I agree with the business world Idea if only bacause of the time involved..at least in the moajority of cases.

Gentoo-Bin?

I will edit as more idea's come to mind.

Ari Rahikkala · Guru Joined: 02 Oct 2002 Posts: 370 Location: Finland

I think we're going to need a forum FAQ entry that says something like "Yes, we've discussed the idea of a binary-based Gentoo before. Go back to your hole, RPM fan, and never even think of suggesting it again here. Oh, and check out GRP while you're on your way, you might be interested".

Well, at least the first and last sentences

.
_________________
<laurentius> gentoo linux?
<ari> Yesh.
<laurentius> they look horny

Agitator[RoX] · n00b Joined: 10 Mar 2003 Posts: 27 Location: Kalmar/Sweden

as for name; Bintoo?

And, yes.. GRP...
_________________
"Linux is metal"

jimlynch11 · Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2003 6:53 pm Post subject:

jimlynch11 · Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2003 6:53 pm Post subject:

sorry for the double post, but i thought the above needed to be reiterated :wink:

i think there is _some_ merit to deciding upon a less time-intensive install, but i dont think binary is the answer. another thread was discussing some sort of grandiose distributed compiling system (like a huge ass distcc network) that works similar to the SETI system. i like this idea alot better because it sticks with the whole concept of gentoo's build from scratch philosophy

christsong84 · Posted: Tue Apr 15, 2003 7:17 pm Post subject:

I'm no fan of RPMs but I do understand a binary distro would be useful for times sake...it was just a thought, no need to get upset over it.

gsfgf · Veteran Joined: 08 May 2002 Posts: 1266

im all for binaries. BSD does it fine, and portage could easily be made to handle binary packages

elboricua · Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2003 1:50 am Post subject:

Isn't there already a Binary Version of Gentoo??? I think it's called Debian or something

I'm kidding by the way :twisted:

_________________
Boricua Hasta La Muerte

cchapman · Guru Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Posts: 440 Location: Fremont, NE

You guys get so upset when someone brings up binary installs...
If you read the origanl post you will understand..
I am looking at using gentoo in a corporation (possibly) and they asked how long an os reload would take...
I informed them roughly 5-10 hours (without wm or X) and there jaws dropped and they asked why so long...
I told them it compiles from scratch (which by the way the kinda liked) but it is just not feasible for a server reload to take 10 hours at minimum.
And when I say binary I dont mean rpm's, they suck.
I am meaning using portage but with a way to emerge binary packages...
The corporation I work for would be very interested if this were the case...
Right now there are looking at freebsd because of the binary capabilities along with ports....
Like I said at the beginning this is just my $.02 worth

guero61 · l33t Joined: 14 Oct 2002 Posts: 811 Location: Behind you

I'll give two points to match your $0.02:

1. Portage does have current binary package useability, by using the -b flag, I think. You could conceivably emerge -b once on a reference platform, then write an ebuild to distribute that package you just compiled.
2. Using the above system, keeping a library of pre-compiled packages, it would be quite simpler and far quicker to reload a machine than from source. That said, I'd be really cautious about leaving compilers on production servers. If it's a critical system, why wouldn't you have backups of the entire machine from which you could do a tape restore?

Do recall that these people are [evidently] coming from a Windows environment wherein it is natural and normal to periodically reload an OS. If you install Linux properly the first time, you almost never have to reinstall. There are almost no problems that could happen to Linux short of a complete hardware failure that cannot be recovered. Granted on some the path of least resistance may be a reinstall.

For corporate use of Gentoo, I would see more this:
1. Centralized reference machines that pump out binaries for use (could use one machine for several different architectures if you set your CFLAGS correctly, easily automated for the currently compiling platform).
2. A trimmed-down portage tree installed on client machines that would be modified to solely use the binary packages from said reference machines.
3. Similar setup for servers as the client machines, except no compiler (there's a post about this from somewhere mid-September to October 2002 -- it's about trying to fit Gentoo onto a 128MB CF card).

This would allow incredible control of what software is installed on the machines -- only that which is desired by the corporation! The only drawback is that many ebuilds would have to be modified to not compile, just use the binary package. Hey, if you're going to the trouble of Gentooifying a corporation, ya may as well modify it to fit your needs!

tolle · Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2003 11:18 am Post subject:

blubber · Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2003 11:58 am Post subject:

Another option is just install gentoo from source, when your finished just tar the distribution, and put it in a safe place. If the machine needs to be re-installed just copy the tar to the harddisk, emerge grub, compile a new kernel. Boot the machine, and it's back up. Now you can emerge -u world in the background, maybe nicing it so it doesn't take all cpu time...

cchapman · Guru Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Posts: 440 Location: Fremont, NE

Fo any of you work ni a corporate place. And i am not talking small...
Where I work theyu are not going to want to get a server just to compile binaries, and backups are good but, how do you get back to the point of being able to restore from backup...
And possible they want more than one machine loaded with it.. I would to see someone explain it to my boss why so much bandwidth was being used.....
Anyone that works in a big corpration should know what I am talking about - they are penny pinchers

If it were binary we could probably house the portage tree internally so and the distfiles so that it is only one machine making connections..

cchapman · Guru Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Posts: 440 Location: Fremont, NE

Does Debian have dependency based startup scripts???

zephyr1256 · Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2003 12:47 pm Post subject:

solatis · Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2003 12:55 pm Post subject:

blubber · Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2003 1:31 pm Post subject:

elboricua · Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2003 1:59 pm Post subject:

guero61 · l33t Joined: 14 Oct 2002 Posts: 811 Location: Behind you

pjp · Administrator Joined: 16 Apr 2002 Posts: 20067

For naming ideas, any binary only distro of Gentoo, I think the name should be Gentoo Valdez.
_________________
Quis separabit? Quo animo?

jimlynch11 · Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2003 3:59 pm Post subject:

jetblack · Posted: Wed Apr 16, 2003 4:07 pm Post subject:

I'd say Gebian.

cchapman · Guru Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Posts: 440 Location: Fremont, NE

cchapman · Guru Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Posts: 440 Location: Fremont, NE

Also on the above note. one machine for compiling one for housing the portage tree and distfiles would equal 6 machines... I could get rid of the compiling machine and possilby the portage tree machine and get buy with 4 computers instead of 6. Its all about ciost savings...

Anyways what does this have to do with a binary distro.