[gentoo-amd64] Re: building emul-linux-x86 files

[Duncan]

"Andy Wang" <dopey74@×××××.com> posted
17dc8bc70804231739jc6f8adcr7eb1b5daf33bda7b@××××××××××.com, excerpted
below, on  Wed, 23 Apr 2008 19:39:32 -0500:

> Just wanted to follow up on this e-mail from a while ago.&nbsp; Any new
> progress on creating documentation for how gentoo builds it&#39;s
> emul-linux-x86-* files?<br><br>Thanks,<br>Andy<br><br><br><div
> class="gmail_quote">On Mon, Nov 26, 2007 at 3:52 PM, Andy Wang &lt;<a
> href="mailto:dopey74@×××××.com">dopey74@×××××.com</a>&gt; wrote:<br>
> <blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204,
> 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;"><div
> class="Ih2E3d">On Nov 23, 2007 12:10 PM, Mike Doty &lt;<a
> href="mailto:kingtaco@g.o">kingtaco@g.o</a>&gt; wrote:<br>

If you'd kill the HTML next time, some of us would be grateful.  Not 
everyone here likes webmail, and HTML based messages can be a security 
issue, so some of us choose not to enable it or use clients that handle 
it.  Thanks.

I don't have a direct answer to your question, but FWIW if I were doing 
it...

I'd use the 32-bit chroot (or build on a 32-bit machine) and use 
FEATURES=buildpkg so all the packages ended up as tbz2 binaries.

For individual cases that should be enough on the build side.  On the 
binary package consumer, I'd use a 32-bit chroot again (to keep the 32-
bit packages tracked separately from the 64-bit ones)  and either emerge 
a more or less full system or use package.provided and/or --nodeps when 
merging individual packages if I chose not to do the full 32-bit system.

For something more suitable for general distribution, IOW, usable 
directly from the main system's portage/other-pm, I'd use the binaries 
created in the first step as the "sources", and build an ebuild script 
wrapper around them to untar and install them manually (and to an 
appropriately different location for libs, or name for executables, than 
the 64-bit stuff), while tracking them using emul- (or similar) to keep 
them separate from the 64-bit packages of the otherwise same name.  The 
same skeleton untar and install script could be used for all such 
packages, with specific extra configuration, etc. attached as necessary.

That seems fairly straightforward and would the existing portage binary 
package capabilities, but is obviously not quite the method they took, as 
they have more generalized packages that include binaries (libraries, 
etc) from multiple normal packages.  The advantage of doing it as above, 
however, would be that the generic wrapper ebuild script could be simply 
renamed as appropriate to use with 32-bit packages other than those 
currently supplied.

As I said, FWIW...  It may or may not be suitable for your purposes.

-- 
Duncan - List replies preferred.   No HTML msgs.
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master --
and if you use the program, he is your master."  Richard Stallman

-- 
gentoo-amd64@l.g.o mailing list