Re: XATTR_PAX migration

On 09/10/2013 07:44 AM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
> On 09/09/2013 07:45 PM, Michael Orlitzky wrote:
>> On 09/09/2013 05:26 PM, Anthony G. Basile wrote:
>>>
>>> You can use XT_PAX provided you're not running something like a
>>> tinderbox, ie doing massive amounts of ebuilds.  The problem is that
>>> install is being wrapped by install.py.  As a result every instance of
>>> install mean invoking the python interpreter.  With lots and lots of
>>> installs, this adds up to being very slow.
>>>
>>
>> Ok, thanks. These are all servers and installing anything is out of the
>> ordinary. Should I add a note about PAX_MARKINGS to the wiki, or is
>> there a plan to make that unnecessary (again)?
>>
> 
> Feel free to add any documentation you guys think is lacking.
> 

Whoops, I don't have rights to edit the page. I wrote the blurb, though:

5. Update make.conf.

To prevent warnings for non-hardened users, portage defaults to PT_PAX
markings when installing packages. If the migration was successful and
your kernel is respecting the new XATTR_PAX markings, you can tell
portage to use them in the future. Simply set,

{{File|/etc/portage/make.conf||<pre>
PAX_MARKINGS="XT"
</pre>}}

in your make.conf.