1 |
It's bikeshedding time. |
2 |
|
3 |
The RAP project (prefix with libc) is now ready to start getting merged into |
4 |
gx86 and (if necessary) prefix overlay, thus giving it some form of official |
5 |
status. Part of that job is writing new profiles for RAP, and adding USE |
6 |
flags allowing ebuilds to distinguish between the two variants of prefix: |
7 |
classic, and RAP. For both purposes, we need names for the two variants, and |
8 |
preferably clear and descriptive names too. |
9 |
|
10 |
For the profiles, the plan is to add profiles |
11 |
default/linux/$arch/13.0/prefix/$classic and |
12 |
default/linux/$arch/13.0/prefix/$rap, possibly with one of the two variants |
13 |
being default and thus renamed to default/linux/$arch/13.0/prefix; |
14 |
default/linux/$arch/13.0/prefix/$classic would symlink to prefix/linux/$arch, |
15 |
or vice versa, and default/linux/$arch/13.0/prefix/$rap would be the all-new |
16 |
RAP profile. (They will probably have a considerable amount of shared |
17 |
structure factored out, but that's another matter.) |
18 |
|
19 |
For the USE flags, there are a handful of ebuilds that need to distinguish |
20 |
between prefix classic and prefix RAP: the toolchains work differently, and |
21 |
the fact that RAP doesn't have /usr/include, /lib, and /usr/lib as valid |
22 |
search paths causes complications for some packages. To support this, the |
23 |
plan is to introduce two new global USE flags, prefix-$classic and |
24 |
prefix-$rap, both of which are masked in the base profile and selectively |
25 |
unmasked in the different prefix profiles. |
26 |
|
27 |
For both purposes, we need names for the two variants. The names should have |
28 |
the property that their meaning should be reasonably clear to the |
29 |
uninitiated, not too ugly, and somewhat accurately describe the difference |
30 |
between the two versions. Specifically, reading the two profile names should |
31 |
give you a good indication of which one to choose, and seeing `if use |
32 |
prefix-$classic` in an ebuild should give the reader a fairly good idea of |
33 |
what's going on. |
34 |
|
35 |
During development, we've been using the name "prefix-rpath" for classic, |
36 |
and "prefix-libc" and "rap" for rap. Of those, I think prefix-rpath is |
37 |
acceptable, but could be improved; the other two are just bad, as far as I'm |
38 |
concerned, and should be replaced. |
39 |
|
40 |
I propose "prefix-native" for rap as an alternative. Does anyone have any good |
41 |
ideas for classic prefix? |
42 |
|
43 |
-- Ruud |