On Aug 24, 2005, at 9:57 AM, Finn Thain wrote:

> On Wed, 24 Aug 2005, Kito wrote:
>
>>
>> On Aug 24, 2005, at 3:51 AM, Finn Thain wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> 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?
>>
>> Well, thats part of the problem. As Darwin is not self-hosting
>> currently, it requires a highly modified OS X environment(read:
>> progressive profile) to built it, and the progressive profile  
>> shares the
>> same keyword, *-macos, with the collision-protected profile. Another
>> keyword isn't really feasible, I was thinking more along the lines  
>> of a
>> variable added to the use-expand list in the profiles.
>
> I just read http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=82513
>
> What did happen to GLEP 22?
>
> I have to say, I find the idea of over-loading the collision- 
> protect hack
> with new macos-specific meaning inside N different ebuilds (by  
> FEATURES
> expansion) quite unpleasant.
>
> To my mind, progressive implies keyword=ppc-darwin/ppc-od, and "2nd  
> class"
> implies ppc-macos and that implies a prefix (substitute x86 or x64  
> for ppc
> as you see fit).
>
> I don't think it likely that apple will open source Mac OS X (or  
> eleven,
> or even system seven). I mean, is it likely that a macos profile could
> ever be anything but second fiddle?

The progressive profile already is, and getting moreso as it matures.  
fex it can/will be used to merge macos components from Apple  
installation media. So it is in fact handling the compilation of the  
'bsd' portion of OS X from source as well as managing the proprietary  
libs and tools like CoreAudio, XCode, etc. This way, packages can do  
things like "DEPEND='>=dev-util/xcode2.1 >=media-sound/coreaudio'"  
and so on. So used in this manner, portage is anything but a second  
class citizen as everything in / is in fact managed by portage.

Even once prefixed installs are available I intend to continue  
development in this area to facilitate extremely minimal OS X  
installs for specialized applications.

--Kito

>
> -f
>
>>
>>>
>>> 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
>>>
>>
>>
> -- 
> gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list
>

-- 
gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list