| 1 |
On Wed, 2009-11-25 at 08:18 -0600, Jeremy Olexa wrote: |
| 2 |
> All - |
| 3 |
> Heads up. Historically, the prefix tree contained *only* ebuilds that |
| 4 |
> were tested to work. As such, they had "prefix" style keywords. |
| 5 |
> (~amd64-linux, ~ppc-macos, etc). Going forward, our tree will be having |
| 6 |
> more and more ebuilds that have not been tested to work with prefix. |
| 7 |
> That is, no prefix keywords but maybe ~amd64, ppc, etc. You cannot set |
| 8 |
> your ACCEPT_KEYWORDS to "amd64" and expect an unchecked ebuild to just |
| 9 |
> work for prefix. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> I've seen more than one person on IRC ask about this, a guaranteed way |
| 12 |
> to set yourself up for failure. If an ebuild is missing your *prefix* |
| 13 |
> keyword, then it needs to be fixed and file a bug for the working |
| 14 |
> package. (We do not have the manpower/motivation to fix all the packages |
| 15 |
> ourselves) |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> Here is some help: |
| 18 |
> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/gentoo-alt/prefix/techdocs.xml |
| 19 |
> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/gentoo-alt/prefix/ecopy.xml |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> Please ask if you need help with something. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Just a question on this. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Are we going to see portage merged in with mainline ? |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
And if so, how is a prefix defined differently from normal usage ? |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Thanks, |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Alan. |
Archives