Re: [gentoo-alt] [PREFIX] the future of Prefix

[Michael Haubenwallner]

On Wed, 2008-10-08 at 15:16 +0200, Fabian Groffen wrote:
> On 08-10-2008 15:12:50 +0200, Michael Haubenwallner wrote:
> > <thoughts>
> > I'm unsure if stating the prefix-awareness in EAPI is right at all, as
> > it is orthogonal and works with any EAPI.

Someone said something like this, (just don't remember who): "When an
usecase of something is orthogonal to what that thing is designed for,
one should consider using a different thing for this usecase."

> > One could think of leaving this indicator to the KEYWORDS - and call
> > prefix an "arch" somehow:
> > </thoughts>
>
> interesting, but I don't think misusing keywords for Prefix is good.

I don't see the real misuse of keywords (yet?):

Currently, keywords indicate:
 x86:       "this runs on [x86] CPU with [Gentoo Linux] OS"
 x86-fbsd:  "this runs on [x86] CPU with [FreeBSD] OS"

They also could indicate:
 x86+macos: "this runs on [x86] CPU with [Gentoo Prefix on MacOSX] OS"

If an ebuild only has keywords "x86" (like sys-kernel/*), then there's
no need to respect ED,EPREFIX,EROOT.
OTOH, if an ebuild does not respect ED,EPREFIX,EROOT, it cannot
correctly get any Prefix keyword.

EAPI="X+prefix"      with Prefix keywords is redundant information, while
EAPI="X+prefix"   without Prefix keywords is useless (but possible), and
EAPI="X" (no prefix) with Prefix keywords is a no-go.

So Prefix-awareness IMO is more a KEYWORD-like information than an
EAPI-like information, no?

Or is it a PROPERTIES-like information (like zmedico's "set")?

/haubi/
-- 
Michael Haubenwallner
Gentoo on a different level