Re: [gentoo-amd64] Re: eselect problems

[Mark Knecht]

On Sun, Nov 23, 2008 at 10:26 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net> wrote:
> "Mark Knecht" <markknecht@×××××.com> posted
> 5bdc1c8b0811231435y2eea1b1by366c787c983c1089@××××××××××.com, excerpted
> below, on  Sun, 23 Nov 2008 14:35:42 -0800:
>
>> The root cause of this is I wanted to emerge the newest version of
>> Ardour from the pro-audio overlay and ran into a new message about it
>> being masked by something called EAPI 2 which according to the message
>> requires a 'newer' version of portage. (No revision given.) That's all
>> this was about, and there's absoutely no rush to fix it as I'm not
>> likely to really use Ardour. Just wanted to take a look at what sort of
>> headway they are making with their feature set so it's really nothing
>> but pure curiosity.
>
> OK.  FWIW, for EAPI-2, you need the new ~arch portage-2.2-rcX series.
> EAPI-2 is allowed in various overlays and now in ~arch, but not in stable
> until a stable portage supports it.  It'll bring a number of new features
> including full set support, per-package use-defaults (previously a USE
> flag could be defaulted to on per profile, but not per package, off being
> the unset default, of course), and IIRC use dependencies (if a package
> requires say C++ support and gcc has been built without it, it must now
> die with an error message telling the user to make the change, with use-
> deps, it could force gcc to be recompiled with C++ instead of dying, thus
> avoiding somebody leaving a 200-package emerge going overnight, only to
> come back the next day to find out it stopped with package #2 due to a
> USE dependency death).
>
> So there are some nice things coming in EAPI-2 and a number of packages
> can really use them.  But an EAPI-2 supporting portage, while now in the
> tree, remains unstable, as there are still a few bugs to work out before
> it goes fully stable.  So if you prefer a stable portage, you'll have to
> wait for EAPI-2, and any packages requiring it (which by definition can't
> be stabilized until an EAPI-2 portage is stable too).
>
> --
> Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.

Thanks Duncan. I basically understand the portage stuff, in the sense
that it's a new feature. I read a few eamils form the portage
developers, etc., and got a sense of some of what it is supposed to
do. that part I'm OK with, as I am, I guess, with the idea that
someone who wrote the Ardour ebuild is requiring these new features.

My real question is what is required to build that portage on an
~amd64 machine so that I can build Ardour? Is anyone on this list
using portage-2.2.x? If so how did they get it to build?

Thanks,
Mark