| 1 |
Hi, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
This mail is continuation of a discussion last month on IRC on |
| 4 |
#gentoo-portage. As I think it's larger than just portage array, here it |
| 5 |
is. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
I have one server dedicated for compilation (xm-compile), and many |
| 8 |
applicative servers (xmred5, lemonhead, etc). |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Currently I use the --buildpkg on xm-compile to build packages |
| 11 |
emergeable by --getbinpkgonly. Everything is fine except that I'm not |
| 12 |
able to --getbinpkg function of USE flags, CFLAGS, CHOST nor ACCEPT_KEYWORDS. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
So all packages on all servers are build in the same way with same USE. |
| 15 |
But I would like to avoid it. I have mx servers (exim) that need mysql |
| 16 |
lib, so mysql USE is there. I have mysql servers so -minimal USE is |
| 17 |
there. I don't want to install a full mysql on mx servers, I just need |
| 18 |
mysql lib. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
So I'd like to build custom packages for almost everything. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
I don't want to build packages on servers for security reasons (somes |
| 23 |
could reproach me that, but it's not the topic ;) and for a limitation |
| 24 |
of disk usage. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
So, I did a wrapper to emerge --buildpkg to create tbz2 with SHA1 in |
| 27 |
names function of USE, like : |
| 28 |
CHOST="x86_64-pc-linux-gnu" |
| 29 |
ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="amd64" |
| 30 |
tcpdump |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
USE="+chroot +ipv6 -ssl -test -samba -smi" |
| 33 |
is placed under /data/pkg/amd64/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/net-analyzer/tcpdump-4.0.1_pre20090709+2bf4bfffad82d4ae519f76770b4f7db7b4416738.tbz2 |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
USE="+chroot +ipv6 +ssl -test +samba -smi" |
| 36 |
is placed under /data/pkg/amd64/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/net-analyzer/tcpdump-4.0.1_pre20090709+5e099e8337e4cadfceda6ccf4c881fbb495980bd.tbz2 |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
Like this, I can easily add on client side a portage bashrc to get the file |
| 39 |
and place it in the good place to don't have portage to download it as |
| 40 |
it would find the right file with good USE. This implies I need to |
| 41 |
emerge 1 package per 1 package which is horrible after some times. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
So, do you guys plan to implement a such thing ? That's one of the |
| 44 |
features that is mostly missing imho. The principal miss in on client |
| 45 |
side as I have tools to manage packages but would like to not have too |
| 46 |
much specific scripts on client side. |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
Thanks, |
| 49 |
|
| 50 |
-- |
| 51 |
Beber |
Archives