Gentoo Archives: gentoo-osx

From: Finn Thain <fthain@××××××××××××××××.au>
To: gentoo-osx@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-osx] On keywording ppc-macos
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2005 08:52:17
Message-Id: Pine.LNX.4.63.0508241843430.21798@loopy.telegraphics.com.au
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-osx] On keywording ppc-macos by Finn Thain
On Wed, 24 Aug 2005, Finn Thain wrote:

> On Tue, 23 Aug 2005, Kito wrote: > > > > > On Aug 23, 2005, at 12:30 PM, Grobian wrote: > > > > On a somewhat related note, we need to decide sooner than later on how > > distinguish between the collision-protect and non-collision-protected > > profiles in ebuilds, as some things that are getting in the tree break > > with a proper gentoo environment, mostly auto{conf,make} issues at the > > moment (-a -c -f stuff, etc) , as well as python issues creeping up as > > well, but this will probably get more convoluted very shortly...
[snip]
> > Now, if an ebuild needs to know that it has "2nd class" status, wouldn't a > use flag be appropriate? And if you were to implement such a use flag, > could it not be useful to other second-class citizens? For example, in > "portage for non-Gentoo Linux" or "portage for solaris" profiles.
Actually, such a use flag is probably redundant. Isn't that what the the "macos" in "ppc-macos" is for? I suspect the whole question goes away when portage gets prefixes. So my post was probably just noise. Sorry. -f -- gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-osx] On keywording ppc-macos Kito <kito@g.o>