| 1 |
Thanks for all the work guys! |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
However, for a jumbo patch like this, I find the "documentation" quite |
| 4 |
limited. I admit I stopped reading after a page or 3, since it started |
| 5 |
to get too scary to think of just applying it. I certainly need more |
| 6 |
talking on this, and given the huge size, I'd even opt for seeing if we |
| 7 |
can push stuff directly to trunk, such that I don't have to shadow |
| 8 |
maintain it. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
On 11-09-2008 11:17:07 +0200, Markus Duft wrote: |
| 12 |
> > |
| 13 |
> > Hi! |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Right after clicking "send" I found a bug in the patch which I introduced |
| 16 |
> while cleaning it up for submission :) attached is now a working version, |
| 17 |
> which has just a small change: the setting of config_root is now done |
| 18 |
> differently, since the config class can be instantiated multiple times for |
| 19 |
> different prefix installations... |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> Cheers, Markus |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> > |
| 24 |
> > Some time ago I talked on this list about my plans on using portage to |
| 25 |
> > emerge packages for native Windows under Interix. To be able to do |
| 26 |
> > this, haubi and I had to "help" portage a little :) we now have a patch |
| 27 |
> > ready with which this is possible. Not only windows draws advantages |
| 28 |
> > out of the patch, but now it is possible to create a "child" prefix. |
| 29 |
> > You can create a base EPREFIX, which contains a system that doesn't |
| 30 |
> > change too often, and then merge packages to different prefixes |
| 31 |
> > building upon that parent prefix. |
| 32 |
> > |
| 33 |
> > For now, only DEPEND's are resolved from the parent EPREFIX -- RDEPEND |
| 34 |
> > and PDEPEND *must* be installed in the child EPREFIX. If a DEPEND |
| 35 |
> > cannot be merged into the parent prefix, portage tries to merge is to |
| 36 |
> > the child. |
| 37 |
> > |
| 38 |
> > Maybe some of you can have a brief look at the patch, and if there are |
| 39 |
> > no objections, I'd like to add the patch to the portage ebuild |
| 40 |
> > conditionally with a USE flag for more testing. If it does not destroy |
| 41 |
> > anything (I greatly doubt that it does...), it would be great to see it |
| 42 |
> > going into svn... |
| 43 |
> > |
| 44 |
> > P.S.: haubi wrote up some comments on the patch and other things... I |
| 45 |
> > attached them as-is, so ask haubi :) |
| 46 |
> > P.S.S.: the patch is against anonsvn-checked-out trunk of prefix |
| 47 |
> > branch... |
| 48 |
> > |
| 49 |
> > Cheers, Markus |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
|
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
|
| 54 |
-- |
| 55 |
Fabian Groffen |
| 56 |
Gentoo on a different level |
Archives