Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Brian Harring <ferringb@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] sys-libs/ncurses: punted from system in profiles
Date: Tue, 06 Dec 2011 22:28:53
Message-Id: 20111206222748.GC18351@localhost.google.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] sys-libs/ncurses: punted from system in profiles by Mike Frysinger
1 On Tue, Dec 06, 2011 at 05:06:33PM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
2 > On Tuesday 06 December 2011 16:52:55 Brian Harring wrote:
3 > > On Tue, Dec 06, 2011 at 03:52:07PM -0500, Mike Frysinger wrote:
4 > > > On Tuesday 06 December 2011 14:28:02 Zac Medico wrote:
5 > > > > On 12/06/2011 10:04 AM, Mike Frysinger wrote:
6 > > > > > what might be interesting is if we had a "Gentoo default" set which
7 > > > > > is what would come in a stage3 rather than the current "stage3 is
8 > > > > > the system set". then we could move virtual/ssh out of the system
9 > > > > > set and into the "Gentoo default" set so it'd be easier for people
10 > > > > > to drop/etc... but i'm not familiar enough with the portage support
11 > > > > > atm to say how feasible such an idea would be.
12 > > > >
13 > > > > Similar to how we use packages.build to define the stage1 set, we could
14 > > > > add a packages.default to define the stage3 set. Alternatively, we
15 > > > > could use a meta-package to pull in the defaults, and adjust the
16 > > > > stage3 build to pull in that meta-package automatically.
17 > > >
18 > > > the packages.default sounds like a good idea as then we'd be able to
19 > > > tweak/stack it on a per-profile basis like existing files. i'll file a
20 > > > release bug on the topic, and then we can talk about moving virtual/ssh
21 > > > out of system and into that.
22 > >
23 > > We really need something generic here rather than just introducing new
24 > > files; this basically duplicates sets for example.
25 >
26 > sets isn't in stable portage yet, right ? and is it stackable in profiles ?
27
28 Bluntly, portage set support from the tree isn't something I'm sure we
29 really want to support /anyways/; it's fairly portage specific last I
30 looked. Also, it isn't stackable from profiles.
31
32 Simple example of why sets.conf cannot be relied on:
33
34 # xorg sets
35 [x11-module-rebuild]
36 class = portage.sets.dbapi.VariableSet
37 world-candidate = false
38 variable = CATEGORY
39 includes = x11-drivers
40
41 Or using a literal overlay example:
42 [jmbsvicetto sets]
43 class = portage.sets.files.StaticFileSet
44 multiset = true
45 directory = ${repository:jmbsvicetto}/sets/
46
47 So for any non portage PM, we'd have to translate portage class name
48 paths, know the actual signature of the target (VariableSet for
49 example), and perfectly emulate that- also emualate the
50 ${var:default} interpolation.
51
52 So... there's no way in hell sets.conf can, nor should be, relied on
53 if we're even pretending to try and support multiple managers. That's
54 putting it nicely. :)
55
56 package.[set-name] from profiles is a potential, although that doesn't
57 work perfectly for overlays (which typically get their profile from
58 the master, thus precluding the overlay from injecting a node into the
59 set); could come up with something though.
60
61 ~harring

Replies