| 1 |
also, I should not that using the keywords "ppc-macos ~ppc-macos ppc" , |
| 2 |
the wonderful tool 'ddd' installed flawlessly :) |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Cheerd, |
| 5 |
Patrick |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
On Jul 31, 2005, at 2:29 AM, Finn Thain wrote: |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> On Sat, 30 Jul 2005, Kito wrote: |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
>> |
| 15 |
>> On Jul 30, 2005, at 8:12 PM, Hasan Khalil wrote: |
| 16 |
>> |
| 17 |
>>> As of yet, portage is not suited for what we have now termed |
| 18 |
>>> 'pathspec', or |
| 19 |
>>> 'installing to an alternate prefix', or 'using portage as a |
| 20 |
>>> secondary package |
| 21 |
>>> manager', etc. Changes are being made to portage that will allow for |
| 22 |
>>> features |
| 23 |
>>> like this, and should be included in the next major release (some |
| 24 |
>>> months away |
| 25 |
>>> still). |
| 26 |
>>> |
| 27 |
>> |
| 28 |
> [snip] |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
>> The main problem as I see it, is you have a live tree of some |
| 31 |
>> ~10,000 linux based packages, with a userbase of >100,000 LINUX |
| 32 |
>> users, a |
| 33 |
>> dev team of >350 linux developers...how on earth do you convince these |
| 34 |
>> linux users and devs that a massively huge project like supporting |
| 35 |
>> arbitrary install prefixes is worth the trouble, especially when it |
| 36 |
>> would mostly benefit a sideproject with 3 devs and probably only |
| 37 |
>> slighty |
| 38 |
>> more users? |
| 39 |
> |
| 40 |
> Remember that for some of us, it doesn't matter if no more than a tiny |
| 41 |
> fraction of ebuilds work. One should not confuse Gentoo (i.e. the |
| 42 |
> portage |
| 43 |
> tree) with Portage itself. Non-Gentoo developers, distros and O/S's can |
| 44 |
> benefit from a portable portage, even if it comes with an empty portage |
| 45 |
> tree. By "portable portage", I mean that it would support new ebuilds |
| 46 |
> that |
| 47 |
> will play nicely on arbitrary host. |
| 48 |
> |
| 49 |
> But the question remains, how to bring the existing ebuilds along for |
| 50 |
> the |
| 51 |
> ride? Kito is right that most linux devs aren't going to care too much. |
| 52 |
> Most of them are not in a position to test their ebuilds on half a |
| 53 |
> dozen |
| 54 |
> different platforms. But then, they don't all test on half a dozen |
| 55 |
> different linux architectures anyway. |
| 56 |
> |
| 57 |
> Hasan, you mentioned pathspec and prefixed installs, and future portage |
| 58 |
> features to accomodate these. Is there more information available |
| 59 |
> anywhere |
| 60 |
> on the portage roadmap and the particular future portage features you |
| 61 |
> are |
| 62 |
> referring to? |
| 63 |
> |
| 64 |
> -f |
| 65 |
> -- |
| 66 |
> gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list |
| 67 |
> |
| 68 |
|
| 69 |
-- |
| 70 |
gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list |
Archives