Gentoo Archives: gentoo-scm

From: "Michał Górny" <gentoo@××××××××××.pl>
To: gentoo-scm@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-scm] Thin Manifests for git
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2010 21:52:00
Message-Id: 20100418235234.7801d487@pomiot.lan
In Reply to: [gentoo-scm] Thin Manifests for git by Nirbheek Chauhan
On Sun, 18 Apr 2010 18:25:02 +0530
Nirbheek Chauhan <nirbheek.chauhan@×××××.com> wrote:

> ====== > Coding: > ====== > * Portage support for thin manifests >  - Most important; a release must be done atleast 1 month before the > migration >  - Testing can be done with overlays > * Repoman support for thin manifests >  - Testing can be done with overlays
These two are directly connected together. I've already coded some basic support for Thin Manifests in my newly-created Portage branch. The branch itself can be looked up at: http://git.mgorny.alt.pl/portage/log/?h=git-repo And the particular commit I'm mentioning here: http://git.mgorny.alt.pl/portage/commit/?h=git-repo&id=2b77f313b89b84dcc04299b83ef9ecfd73318cd6 I've did as much as I could without getting more information, and turning everything around. What it can is: 1) Detect '.git' and enable Thin Manifests (only dirty check), 2) generate Thin Manifests with only DIST checksums, 3) merge ebuilds with Thin Manifests. I have tested it against a random kde-sunset and x11 overlay ebuilds (the former having DIST checksums, the latter being empty). What we don't (I guess so, I haven't checked it) support now is non-existent Manifests. Are we supposed to support them, or should we always generate Manifests, even if they will be empty? -- Best regards, Michał Górny <http://mgorny.alt.pl> <xmpp:mgorny@××××××.ru>

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-scm] Thin Manifests for git Fabian Groffen <grobian@g.o>