Gentoo Archives: gentoo-osx

From: m h <sesquile@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-osx@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-osx] The road ahead?
Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2005 22:02:25
Message-Id: e36b84ee0511011401h45ea56cbo7e19273e980efb83@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-osx] The road ahead? by Kito
1 > >
2 > > Well, if this is "round two" (which seems kind of weird since it's
3 > > backported from v2.1 to 2.0...).
4 >
5 > Well. the 2.1 branch has been officially killed, which is the version
6 > Haubi did his original work on, so Brian back ported it just so we
7 > could start testing out the ebuilds in an overlay and have a working
8 > prototype.
9
10 Well, I'm interested in testing the 2.0 version if possible. 3.0
11 timeframe is start of next year?
12
13 >
14 > > I'm interested in tracking the
15 > > "official" version as closely as possible. Maybe I should test this
16 > > version out on FC4. What will "round three", etc, look like (are
17 > > there missing features, is it just testing, getting ebuilds converted,
18 > > evangelism)?
19 > >
20 > > Kito- Could you please elaborate on the bootstrap process?
21 >
22 > Well, I started by building a toolchain manually in the prefix
23 > (gcc,cctools[apples linker/assembler], coreutils, make, python, bash
24 > and some others I'm forgetting), then configured and installed
25 > portage. Once portage was up and running I just started importing the
26 > base-system ebuilds to the overlay and merging as I went along. On a
27 > FC4 system, you could probably just use some symlinks instead of
28 > manually building a toolchain for bootstrap.
29 >
30
31 Yeah on linux you could get by pretty easily. But if you want to
32 allow end users to add new archs (could be distro, or posix operating
33 system) wouldn't it be easier to have something like haubi's
34 bootstrapper?
35
36 > I've finished the base-system ebuilds for a Darwin/OS X prefix, but
37 > for linux you will still need a few extra that I haven't done yet,
38 > like binutils, libtool, and gcc[1]. I'm going back and doing some
39 > cleanup and additional testing, should have it checked into svn later
40 > this week. Definitely want to get this working on as many archs as
41 > possible, so any help is welcome.
42 >
43 > > Perhaps
44 > > we could put it in the wiki?
45 >
46 > I was going to create a project page in xml under the gentoo-alt
47 > page, but a wiki might be a better idea, especially if a few other
48 > non-gentoo devs want to start helping out with the linux/aix/solaris
49 > stuff.
50 >
51
52 Making the information public is better than no information. It seems
53 like it is better suited to be in the wiki right now, since end users
54 (non-gento devs) could add/edit/fix things in it.
55
56 > > Regarding changes to ebuilds, yes I
57 > > agree small (or no) changes is preferred.
58 >
59 > Yeah, by far the biggest change needed right now is `make DESTDIR=$
60 > {DEST} install`. I've made functions to address the ebuilds that
61 > don't use econf, so the changes are very very slight, and with some
62 > more work could probably even be lessened further.
63 >
64
65 So DEST is PREFIX now?
66
67 > > I went ahead and installed
68 > > apache2 in my prefixed environment and it was relatively
69 > > straightforward.
70 >
71 > Yeah, I'm having great luck so far, running gtk+, jack, and ardour
72 > out of the prefix with no problems and very minor ebuild changes.
73 >
74
75 That is awesome.
76 > >
77 > > Brian- Do you have any idea of the roadmap for prefix getting into
78 > > portage? Would it possibly get into 2.0? 2.1? Rewrite? What will
79 > > determine this?
80 >
81 > I'll let Brian answer this, but I'm fairly certain there is no chance
82 > of this making it into the 2.0 series, 2.1 is dead, so 3.0 will have
83 > to be our saviour (boooo! hsssss! bad pun)
84
85 Looking forward to 3.0 then....
86
87 --
88 gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-osx] The road ahead? Kito <kito@g.o>