| 1 |
On Thu, 30 Sep 2010 16:43:40 +0200, Al <oss.elmar@××××××××××.com> |
| 2 |
wrote: |
| 3 |
> Hello foks, |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
> <snip> |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
Your work effort is appreciated! |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> What are the next steps required to implement the Cygwin system |
| 10 |
> officially into Gentoo Prefix? |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Past experience has left me jaded against adding support for more |
| 13 |
platforms. Unless there are >1 highly *motivated* devs willing to work |
| 14 |
with other Gentoo devs and other upstreams, I'd prefer that we didn't |
| 15 |
add the platform's keywords/patches/etc. Normally what happens is that |
| 16 |
more work gets "dumped" on the current Prefix developers in our efforts |
| 17 |
to migrate packages back to Gentoo Linux and upstream. I, personally, |
| 18 |
added unofficial support for ~arm-linux to the tree but didn't add any |
| 19 |
keywords back in Jan 2010. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
A small case study: |
| 22 |
~x86-interix support, "currently broken" quote from the lead dev. Not |
| 23 |
likely to get fixed soon. Causes headaches when trying to migrate |
| 24 |
packages to Gentoo Linux. |
| 25 |
~x86-winnt, worse than interix. |
| 26 |
~m68k-mint, semi-supported by power user. Often patches are accepted |
| 27 |
upstream and we don't see them (except for toolchain). |
| 28 |
~irix-mips, power user..many bugs in bugzilla, not supported in |
| 29 |
tree..no devs have access or desire. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
How to go forward: |
| 32 |
- I suggest that you maintain your own overlay on an external site. We |
| 33 |
can add your overlay to layman's configuration. This will allow you to |
| 34 |
work independantly of us and will allow your platform to mature before |
| 35 |
devs accept it. I think this is the best compromise for all parties |
| 36 |
involved. If you don't need any patches then you don't need an overlay |
| 37 |
and can simply add another keywrod to your ACCEPT_KEYWORDS variable. |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
-Jeremy |
Archives