Sorry to come to this so late - I'm just back from holiday.
On Aug 8, 2005, at 6:38 am, Kito wrote:
> Maybe you misunderstood, what I think is futile is trying to avoid
> overwriting files, and accommodating things portage has no knowledge
> of or control over.
Unless you avoid over-writing Mac OS's system files Gentoo-OSX will
never become mainstream. I don't know if this is of interest to you or
not, but I for one will never install Gentoo-OSX unless it installs
safely into an /opt (or similar) directory - overwriting Apple's system
files is _bound_ to break something eventually.
You say that accommodating Appe's system is accommodating files portage
has no knowledge of or control over, but at least you have control over
the whole portage tree.
Imagine I spend several ££$£$$£$£$£ on Mathematica, and have a problem
with it; I contact Wolfram support and they say, "Do you have
Gentoo-OSX installed? Sorry, we can't support you - you might have
over-written any of Apple's system files, so we need to you format your
hard-drive & reinstall OS X before submitting this bug".
There is no way that Gentoo can resolve a situation like this to the be
benefit of the user. If, on the other hand, apps-foo/bar-player depends
upon Apple's tar to unpack it, and Apple break that, then you're in a
position to change the ebuild and have a fix rolled-out for all users
next time they sync the tree.
I haven't ever used Portage on OS X, and I don't develop for
Gentoo-Linux (just submit the occasional bug report and do testing),
but I've been using Gentoo for a couple of years now and have been
interested in this project from the start - it was my G4 that Dan
Robbins shelled into to first try porting Portage in June 2003. It
seems to me that an understanding that over-writing Apple's system
files MUST affect system stability, and is hence something that the
majority of users should avoid, would go a long way to getting this
project taken more seriously by devs of other arches.
email@example.com mailing list