Re: [gentoo-osx] The road ahead?

[Kito]

On Nov 1, 2005, at 1:16 PM, m h wrote:

> On 10/31/05, Kito <kito@g.o> wrote:
>>
>> On Oct 31, 2005, at 6:32 PM, Brian Harring wrote:
>>
>>> On Mon, Oct 31, 2005 at 04:16:44PM -0800, m h wrote:
>>>
>>> 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.
>>
>> Those last 2 words should be stressed... don't want anyone getting
>> false ideas of whats being done here...
>
> Well, if this is "round two" (which seems kind of weird since it's
> backported from v2.1 to 2.0...).

Well. the 2.1 branch has been officially killed, which is the version  
Haubi did his original work on, so Brian back ported it just so we  
could start testing out the ebuilds in an overlay and have a working  
prototype.

> I'm interested in tracking the
> "official" version as closely as possible. Maybe I should test this
> version out on FC4.  What will "round three", etc, look like (are
> there missing features, is it just testing, getting ebuilds converted,
> evangelism)?
>
> Kito- Could you please elaborate on the bootstrap process?

Well, I started by building a toolchain manually in the prefix  
(gcc,cctools[apples linker/assembler], coreutils, make, python, bash  
and some others I'm forgetting), then configured and installed  
portage. Once portage was up and running I just started importing the  
base-system ebuilds to the overlay and merging as I went along. On a  
FC4 system, you could probably just use some symlinks instead of  
manually building a toolchain for bootstrap.

I've finished the base-system ebuilds for a Darwin/OS X prefix, but  
for linux you will still need a few extra that I haven't done yet,  
like binutils, libtool, and gcc[1]. I'm going back and doing some  
cleanup and additional testing, should have it checked into svn later  
this week. Definitely want to get this working on as many archs as  
possible, so any help is welcome.

>   Perhaps
> we could put it in the wiki?

I was going to create a project page in xml under the gentoo-alt  
page, but a wiki might be a better idea, especially if a few other  
non-gentoo devs want to start helping out with the linux/aix/solaris  
stuff.

> Regarding changes to ebuilds, yes I
> agree small (or no) changes is preferred.

Yeah, by far the biggest change needed right now is `make DESTDIR=$ 
{DEST} install`. I've made functions to address the ebuilds that  
don't use econf, so the changes are very very slight, and with some  
more work could probably even be lessened further.

> I went ahead and installed
> apache2 in my prefixed environment and it was relatively
> straightforward.

Yeah, I'm having great luck so far, running gtk+, jack, and ardour  
out of the prefix with no problems and very minor ebuild changes.

>
> Brian-  Do you have any idea of the roadmap for prefix getting into
> portage?  Would it possibly get into 2.0? 2.1? Rewrite?  What will
> determine this?

I'll let Brian answer this, but I'm fairly certain there is no chance  
of this making it into the 2.0 series, 2.1 is dead, so 3.0 will have  
to be our saviour (boooo! hsssss! bad pun)

--Kito


[1] I chose to use the apple branch of gcc, as most upstream packages  
have started expecting it on Darwin systems, and have started using  
apple-specific flags such as -mdynamic-no-pic and -no-cpp-precomp and  
-faltivec, so I figured this is the path of least resistance. Plus  
this allows us to take advantage of Frameworks...

-- 
gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list