Gentoo Archives: gentoo-alt

From: Christopher Friedt <chrisfriedt@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-alt@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-alt] portable EPREFIX? ... crossdev toolchains, anyone?
Date: Fri, 27 May 2011 16:35:25
Message-Id: BANLkTikbTxFtOJr49v7sF2_Af6h+4REkzQ@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-alt] portable EPREFIX? ... crossdev toolchains, anyone? by Jeremy Olexa
On Fri, May 27, 2011 at 11:59 AM, Jeremy Olexa <darkside@g.o> wrote:
> when emerging binpkgs if "build EPREFIX" != "your EPREFIX" - the catch? The > build prefix must be longer than then new prefix. I build binaries in a > prefix that is 97 characters long, assuming that the average user will pick > a shorter location ;) This greatly reduces the time for a new prefix > installation (down to as quick as 5-7 minutes). In my opinion, changing the > docs is even less of a solution.
Good call - there's always a catch though isn't there ;-) Just overwriting strings in the binaries sounds like a good idea. Then there's also random regular text files too. Crossdev can be easily patched to work 'properly', and glibc / gcc have a bit of spots that need to be massaged, but otherwise it's doable (I can say that now that I've had to do it a couple of times). So is there any momentum for eprefixed binaries? I.e. something of a stage3? It seems like it will always be an ongoing battle, but string substitution probably eliminates a large part of that. Cheers, C

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-alt] portable EPREFIX? ... crossdev toolchains, anyone? Fabian Groffen <grobian@g.o>