| 1 |
> |
| 2 |
> > The RAP bootstrap has not yet been considered finished. |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
|
| 5 |
That's ok. I suggest adding the current status & the link on the Prefix |
| 6 |
libc wiki site since it's the google top page. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> > Nice catch, patch welcome. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Tar could be fixed by using v 1.27, if that is an option - I don't know the |
| 13 |
version upgrade policy of your distro. eg. Any version upgrade may break |
| 14 |
older OS builds. I would help with patches, but I'm short on free time at |
| 15 |
the moment. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
> >> Issue 2 in the new script is during phase 2, it tries to untar the |
| 19 |
> >> missing files rap-overlay-perl.tar.bz2, rap-overlay-openrc.tar.bz2 and |
| 20 |
> >> rap-overlay-portage.tar.bz2 |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> > I don't know what they are. Could you be more specific? |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> |
| 25 |
The patches I listed (rap-overlay-perl.tar.bz2, rap-overlay-openrc.tar.bz2 |
| 26 |
and rap-overlay-portage.tar.bz2) were introduced & required by the second |
| 27 |
bootstrap script - I don't have them. I assumed you had them since the |
| 28 |
changes were in your git tree? |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
> If you want to use Prefix on Fedora 20 and newer, a classic Prefix using |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
> host glibc will do, too. That receives more testing and might work more |
| 33 |
> smoothly. |
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
> |
| 36 |
Thanks, it was your glibc & binutils eprefix patches that I was most |
| 37 |
interested in, and x32 multi-lib which Fedora/RHEL explicitly doesn't |
| 38 |
support. I've got my own prefix-style system for the other packages. |
Archives