| 1 |
On 06-07-2009 09:45:40 +0200, Michael Haubenwallner wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sun, 2009-07-05 at 20:57 -0500, Jeremy Olexa wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Fabian Groffen wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> > > - update gx86 cvs checkout |
| 6 |
> > > - rsync it without CVS dirs to the candidate image |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Wouldn't the official gx86 rsync mirror be sufficient to avoid the cvs |
| 9 |
> checkout here? |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
they aren't up-to-date enough, and I don't have access/permission to rsync1 |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
> > > - update Prefix tree svn checkout |
| 14 |
> > > - remove all packages in the candidate image which exist in the Prefix |
| 15 |
> > > tree |
| 16 |
> > > - rsync the Prefix tree without .svn dirs over the candidate image |
| 17 |
> > > - distribute the candidate image to rsync1 |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> While I'm aware that we will have to use the whole gx86 tree once, it |
| 20 |
> feels like too early to bloat the prefix tree by >11500 packages (>13700 |
| 21 |
> packages in gx86 versus >2200 in prefix). |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Does it matter? Apart from size? With metadata it's pretty fast. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
> Eventually keep some list of packages (or directories) to incorporate |
| 26 |
> unmodified from gx86 (profiles, eclass, mail-client/mutt) for prefix |
| 27 |
> rsync generation instead... |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
How? The objective was to *reduce* overhead/maintenance for me, not to |
| 30 |
add more stuff around it. Frankly, I'm getting quite sick of syncing |
| 31 |
and merging my and other's changes back and forth between Prefix tree |
| 32 |
and gx86. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
> > Wouldn't it be more worthwhile to merge our portage changes back to |
| 35 |
> > trunk and get a prefix aware portage released officially before we worry |
| 36 |
> > about merging individual packages/eclasses? |
| 37 |
> |
| 38 |
> Agreed, sys-apps/portage should be one of the very first prefix-aware |
| 39 |
> packages in gx86. This would allow for easy bootstrapping some Prefix |
| 40 |
> instances on top of a normal Gentoo Linux without the need to manually |
| 41 |
> install the initial prefix-aware portage. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
Is there anyone going to help me out with this? |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
> And when we add some app-portage/eprefix-bootstrap.ebuild to gx86, |
| 46 |
> normal gx86 users&devs could enjoy the Prefix world somehow easily, |
| 47 |
> using their /usr/portage/ with Prefix tree as usual overlay (TODO: |
| 48 |
> finish this thought)... |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
I don't see this of any real use, and only forsee more and more |
| 51 |
maintenance burden (probably mostly for me). |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
-- |
| 55 |
Fabian Groffen |
| 56 |
Gentoo on a different level |
Archives