Gentoo Archives: gentoo-osx

From: "P. A. A." <adijedi@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-osx@l.g.o
Subject: Re: also ddd Re: [gentoo-osx] Current status
Date: Mon, 01 Aug 2005 18:19:16
Message-Id: 1057d2ba40808e995821fbfad4a03c64@mac.com
In Reply to: also ddd Re: [gentoo-osx] Current status by "P. A. A."
[oops, it should be "I should note" :)]
---

also, I should note that using the keywords "ppc-macos ~ppc-macos ppc" 
, the wonderful tool 'ddd' installed flawlessly :)

Cheers,
Patrick


On Aug 1, 2005, at 1:13 PM, P. A. A. wrote:

> also, I should not that using the keywords "ppc-macos ~ppc-macos ppc" > , the wonderful tool 'ddd' installed flawlessly :) > > Cheerd, > Patrick > > > On Jul 31, 2005, at 2:29 AM, Finn Thain wrote: > >> >> >> On Sat, 30 Jul 2005, Kito wrote: >> >>> >>> On Jul 30, 2005, at 8:12 PM, Hasan Khalil wrote: >>> >>>> As of yet, portage is not suited for what we have now termed >>>> 'pathspec', or >>>> 'installing to an alternate prefix', or 'using portage as a >>>> secondary package >>>> manager', etc. Changes are being made to portage that will allow >>>> for features >>>> like this, and should be included in the next major release (some >>>> months away >>>> still). >>>> >>> >> [snip] >> >>> The main problem as I see it, is you have a live tree of some >>> ~10,000 linux based packages, with a userbase of >100,000 LINUX >>> users, a >>> dev team of >350 linux developers...how on earth do you convince >>> these >>> linux users and devs that a massively huge project like supporting >>> arbitrary install prefixes is worth the trouble, especially when it >>> would mostly benefit a sideproject with 3 devs and probably only >>> slighty >>> more users? >> >> Remember that for some of us, it doesn't matter if no more than a tiny >> fraction of ebuilds work. One should not confuse Gentoo (i.e. the >> portage >> tree) with Portage itself. Non-Gentoo developers, distros and O/S's >> can >> benefit from a portable portage, even if it comes with an empty >> portage >> tree. By "portable portage", I mean that it would support new ebuilds >> that >> will play nicely on arbitrary host. >> >> But the question remains, how to bring the existing ebuilds along for >> the >> ride? Kito is right that most linux devs aren't going to care too >> much. >> Most of them are not in a position to test their ebuilds on half a >> dozen >> different platforms. But then, they don't all test on half a dozen >> different linux architectures anyway. >> >> Hasan, you mentioned pathspec and prefixed installs, and future >> portage >> features to accomodate these. Is there more information available >> anywhere >> on the portage roadmap and the particular future portage features you >> are >> referring to? >> >> -f >> -- >> gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list >> > > -- > gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list >
-- gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: also ddd Re: [gentoo-osx] Current status Lina Pezzella <J4rg0n@g.o>