Re: [gentoo-embedded] uclibc profile

[Ned Ludd]

On Sun, 2004-06-27 at 05:41, Peter S. Mazinger wrote:
> On 26 Jun 2004, Ned Ludd wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 2004-06-26 at 13:52, Peter S. Mazinger wrote:
> > > Hello!
> > >
> > > This is the uclibc stackable profile structure and config I am using now
> > > for the uclibc based system (tested only the hardened one).
> > >
> > > An unusual thing happens though:
> > > if I use the inheritance of base (parent file having ../base), somehow
> > > perl is in as requirement, and I can't find out which package brings it in.
> > >
> > > My proposal would be to use a new base for uclibc based systems, that are
> > > not inheriting anything from base. It can be built from the current base
> > > file removing those packages w/ ^- in uclibc/packages
> >
> > ok take a look at what I just checked into portage/profiles/uclibc.
>
> change virtuals:
> add virtual/glibc dev-libs/uclibc (almost all ebuilds require this, so
> rewriting them would take much time)

Not so bad really.. Only 3000+ .ebuilds need to be updated. I will help
SpanKY if he needs/wants todo it in one big massive swoop.

I'll updated the PROVIDES on uclibc to PROVIDE="virtual/glibc
virtual/libc" to ease the migration of this and made sure the profile
provides both.

>
> the use.defaults should go into base
>
> the packages file will only work if you also add the parent file (having
> ../base)
>
> the other way round would be to copy ../base/packages, remove the packages
> w/ '^-' in my packages file, and add the proper minimal versions to it.

Sure we can do that... But lets try to drop the unneeded things from the
base.

>
> Peter
>
>
>
> --
> gentoo-embedded@g.o mailing list
-- 
Ned Ludd <solar@g.o>
Gentoo (hardened,security,infrastructure,embedded,toolchain) Developer