| 1 |
On Wed, 17 Aug 2005, Grobian wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> Kito wrote: |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
[snip] |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> > Now, as far as portage having knowledge about what software is |
| 9 |
> > installed...if it lived in its own prefix, that wouldn't be an issue, |
| 10 |
> > as all package dependencies would be handled and installed by portage, |
| 11 |
> > avoiding linking against OS X system libs as much as possible. This |
| 12 |
> > would make it possible for instance to have /gentoo on say an external |
| 13 |
> > drive that could be mounted and used on virtually any Mac OSX system, |
| 14 |
> > regardless of system updates, etc. |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> > That being said, I feel like the name for such a tool shouldn't be |
| 17 |
> > called 'Gentoo for OS X', as thats a very misleading name which seems |
| 18 |
> > to cause a lot of confusion amongst users and developers alike. A much |
| 19 |
> > more apt title IMHO would be 'Portage for Mac OS X', and leave the |
| 20 |
> > title 'Gentoo for Mac OS X' for the profiles that actually manage |
| 21 |
> > system files. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> Amen! Couldn't agree more. |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
If you will humour me, what's the difference? Apart from prefix, what |
| 27 |
distinguishes profiles that manage the host OS and profiles that don't? |
| 28 |
(Given that a profile can change just about every aspect of portage's |
| 29 |
behaviour.) |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
The reason I ask is this: greedily, I want Kito's /gentoo on an external |
| 32 |
drive, and I also want to chroot into it sometimes [1]. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
The implication being, 'Portage for Mac OS X' would have to be equivalent |
| 35 |
to 'Gentoo for Mac OS X'. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
This idea extrapolates from the original pathspec, which described a |
| 38 |
self-similar directory structure. (I guess the idea was that the ebuilds |
| 39 |
shouldn't have to care.) |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
Anyway, as someone who doesn't cut any code for this project, I think I |
| 42 |
should stop making outrageous demands now ;-) |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
-f |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
|
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
[1] This can be done (I learned this trick from Ryan Oliver's Pure LFS |
| 49 |
technique). You install everything prefixed /Volumes/Gentoo, then |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
mkdir /Volumes/Gentoo/Volumes |
| 52 |
ln -s ../.. /Volumes/Gentoo/Volumes/Gentoo |
| 53 |
chroot /Volumes/Gentoo |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
Outside the chroot, /etc/make.profile defines the prefix as |
| 56 |
/Volumes/Gentoo, whilst inside the chroot, /etc/make.profile uses the same |
| 57 |
prefix. The chroot profile may need to be different, if portage is |
| 58 |
expecting Mac OS X here... hence my initial question, "What's the |
| 59 |
difference?" |
| 60 |
|
| 61 |
I'm assuming that any required OS X libraries have been copied to the |
| 62 |
Gentoo volume first, and the psuedo filesystems mounted (as with any |
| 63 |
chroot). |
| 64 |
-- |
| 65 |
gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list |
Archives