1 |
On Wed, 17 Aug 2005, Grobian wrote: |
2 |
|
3 |
> |
4 |
> Kito wrote: |
5 |
> |
6 |
[snip] |
7 |
> > |
8 |
> > Now, as far as portage having knowledge about what software is |
9 |
> > installed...if it lived in its own prefix, that wouldn't be an issue, |
10 |
> > as all package dependencies would be handled and installed by portage, |
11 |
> > avoiding linking against OS X system libs as much as possible. This |
12 |
> > would make it possible for instance to have /gentoo on say an external |
13 |
> > drive that could be mounted and used on virtually any Mac OSX system, |
14 |
> > regardless of system updates, etc. |
15 |
> > |
16 |
> > That being said, I feel like the name for such a tool shouldn't be |
17 |
> > called 'Gentoo for OS X', as thats a very misleading name which seems |
18 |
> > to cause a lot of confusion amongst users and developers alike. A much |
19 |
> > more apt title IMHO would be 'Portage for Mac OS X', and leave the |
20 |
> > title 'Gentoo for Mac OS X' for the profiles that actually manage |
21 |
> > system files. |
22 |
> |
23 |
> Amen! Couldn't agree more. |
24 |
> |
25 |
|
26 |
If you will humour me, what's the difference? Apart from prefix, what |
27 |
distinguishes profiles that manage the host OS and profiles that don't? |
28 |
(Given that a profile can change just about every aspect of portage's |
29 |
behaviour.) |
30 |
|
31 |
The reason I ask is this: greedily, I want Kito's /gentoo on an external |
32 |
drive, and I also want to chroot into it sometimes [1]. |
33 |
|
34 |
The implication being, 'Portage for Mac OS X' would have to be equivalent |
35 |
to 'Gentoo for Mac OS X'. |
36 |
|
37 |
This idea extrapolates from the original pathspec, which described a |
38 |
self-similar directory structure. (I guess the idea was that the ebuilds |
39 |
shouldn't have to care.) |
40 |
|
41 |
Anyway, as someone who doesn't cut any code for this project, I think I |
42 |
should stop making outrageous demands now ;-) |
43 |
|
44 |
-f |
45 |
|
46 |
|
47 |
|
48 |
[1] This can be done (I learned this trick from Ryan Oliver's Pure LFS |
49 |
technique). You install everything prefixed /Volumes/Gentoo, then |
50 |
|
51 |
mkdir /Volumes/Gentoo/Volumes |
52 |
ln -s ../.. /Volumes/Gentoo/Volumes/Gentoo |
53 |
chroot /Volumes/Gentoo |
54 |
|
55 |
Outside the chroot, /etc/make.profile defines the prefix as |
56 |
/Volumes/Gentoo, whilst inside the chroot, /etc/make.profile uses the same |
57 |
prefix. The chroot profile may need to be different, if portage is |
58 |
expecting Mac OS X here... hence my initial question, "What's the |
59 |
difference?" |
60 |
|
61 |
I'm assuming that any required OS X libraries have been copied to the |
62 |
Gentoo volume first, and the psuedo filesystems mounted (as with any |
63 |
chroot). |
64 |
-- |
65 |
gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list |