Re: [Dragora-users] Proposal: flexible script to create different images

[DustDFG]

On Sat, May 14, 2022 at 9:06 PM Matías Fonzo <selk@dragora.org> wrote:
>
> El 2022-05-14 10:05, DustDFG escribió:
> > On Sat, May 14, 2022 at 6:08 AM DustDFG <dfgdust@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> On Fri, May 13, 2022 at 10:18 PM Matias Fonzo <selk@dragora.org>
> >> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > El 2022-05-13 13:51, DustDFG escribió:
> >> > > Hello!
> >> > >
> >> > > I started to get confused in a lot of ghosts of previous messages so I
> >> > > decided to delete them
> >> > >
> >> > >>
> >> > >> The package names will look to something like (sorry, I am not at
> >> > >> Dragora right now):
> >> > >>
> >> > >>      kmod_29_amd64+1@kernel.tlz
> >> > >>      kernel-buildtree-generic_5.16.18_amd64+1@kernel.tlz
> >> > >>      kernel-generic_5.16.18_amd64+3@essential.tlz (with the category
> >> > >> renamed)
> >> > >>
> >> > >
> >> > > I wanted to say that we will give:
> >> > >
> >> > > category/package-name
> >> > >
> >> > > essential/kernel-generic (now at kernel category)
> >> > > essential/kernel-headers (now at kernel category)
> >> > > essential/firmware (now at kernel category)
> >> > >
> >> > > kernel/buildtree-generic
> >> > > kernel/kmod
> >> > >
> >> > > I don't think that it is a so good idea but what do you think about
> >> > > making
> >> > > the kernel category as subcategory for essential?
> >> >
> >> > Sounds good, the subcategory can be package_name@essential_kernel.tlz
> >> > and we don't need add more code, except for those third-party tools that
> >> > tries to guess the second category.
> >> >
> >>
> >> In this case we will give situation when two packages (kmod and
> >> buildtree-generic) are part of essential category hierarchy but in the
> >> same time they aren't part of minimal system.
> >>
> >
> > I am sorry, it was a mistake. I found that kernel/generic depends on
> > kernel/kmod
>
> Yes, kmod is needed to handle the Linux kernel modules.  There is no
> problem!
>
> In the case of "kernel/buildtree-generic", this is not essential, as it
> is the build directory as it is generated from the "kernel/generic"
> recipe, depicting how it was produced using our instructions/config,
> also packaged so that the user as well as other software can make use of
> it ("other" software that needs the Linux Kernel build-tree to build)...
>

I meant exactly this

> >> I also think that we can make an exception for kernel category and not
> >> to change it. So we will get essential category that contains
> >> everything for the minimal system except the kernel. It is obvious
> >> that system needs kernel for running so it isn't so necessary to point
> >> out it. In this case, hypothetical essential.order file will process
> >> only packages from these two categories and it looks logical. What do
> >> you think about it? What do you like more (subcategory or exception
> >> for kernel category or maybe something else)?
>
> I'm sending a reply in another email, so it doesn't get too long.
>