| 1 |
Hi, |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
another two cents: |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
On 11/10/2017 12:03 AM, Samuel Bernardo wrote: |
| 6 |
> Hi, |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> I send this email to know the devs opinion about Gentoo integration with |
| 9 |
> Open Build Service[1]. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> When creating specialized images and using an automated process for |
| 12 |
> testing before deployment, I think that Open Build Service would be |
| 13 |
> useful. It already support all major binary based distros and I think |
| 14 |
> that Gentoo could be in there also. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Well, Gentoo is a Meta Distribution, and it's binary instantiation usually |
| 17 |
does emerge on the users machine(s). So users actually do have their private |
| 18 |
binary distribution - either with or without caching the binary packages. |
| 19 |
(In my opinion, a binary distribution is little more than a cache for binary |
| 20 |
packages, to avoid the need for compilation resources on the target machine.) |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Of course there is chance that users do have identical profile setups (USE flags, |
| 23 |
optimization flags, etc.), which is where OBS (or similar) indeed feels useful. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Rather than sharing binary packages, an idea is to share Gentoo user's profile |
| 26 |
setups - with the cache for binary packages to be optional (yet powered by some |
| 27 |
open build service). Note that some USE flags disallow binary packaging at all. |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Wouldn't we gain something like a "Social Linux Distribution Network" then? |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
/haubi/ |
Archives