Re: [gentoo-osx] The road ahead?

[m h]

On 10/31/05, Brian Harring <ferringb@g.o> wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 04:16:44PM -0800, m h wrote:
> > Kito-
> >
> > Are you leveraging the work done by Haubi documented here:
> > http://gentoo-wiki.com/HOWTO_Use_prefixed_portage_%28in_development%29
>
> Yah, although differs in certain respects;
>
> 1) affix doesn't exist
> 2) bound to a temp EAPI to use for masking non prefix capable ebuilds
> 3) Strict paths.  *really* strict.
> 4) by hand reimplementation of the python side of the modifications
> 5) stable based.  the patch referenced is 2.1; I (mostly by hand I'm
> afraid) backported the relevant chunks, rewriting what was needed and
> simplifying it down a bit (affix removal fex).
>
> There is common code between them, but right now the prefix patch I've
> been splitting off of 2.0.51-rc4 is the simple cousin of haubi's work,
> round two basically, with a lot of patch monkeying via kito/myself to
> iron the beast out.
>
> > Just wondering because I've been able to use this to get portage
> > installed on a FC4 system (I know it's not OSX).  But another user has
> > been able to use this to install over 200 packages on an AIX system.
>
> Should be usable in both cases.  Literally, the prefix stable patch is
> chunks of my 2.1 work and haubi's work torn out and integrated into 2.0
> for prototype demonstration.  Exempting the AFFIX difference, should
> work in a similar fashion across systems, although haubi's stage0 work
> is a seperate thing.
>

(I don't miss AFFIX...actually I think it's a little confusing). 
Thanks for the response Brian.  I'm just wondering if your changes are
being tracked anywhere or if there is discussion of this going on
anywhere (in a mailing list perhaps?)?  I like to lurk there if
possible...

What bootstrap process do you recommend? (since you aren't using haubi's)

-- 
gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list