Re: [gentoo-catalyst] Binary package dependencies and update_seed

[Matt Turner <mattst88@gentoo.org>]

On Thu, Apr 11, 2013 at 11:53 AM, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina
<zerochaos@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> Not sure this is the way to go. I'll have to think through the
>> implications. Consider your stage1 build dies with some stupid tree
>> breakage that you can fix in your portage snapshot and restart the
>> stage build. This is going to cause your stage to rebuild everything.
>>
>> Wouldn't disabling the use of binary packages during the seed stage
>> update fix this?
>>
>>
> I'm not sure I'd call rebuilding it every time a "fix" when you just
> rejected deleting the bad packages and rebuilding ONCE.

I'm not sure what you mean.

Updating the seed stage should only ever happen once. If that fails
and you don't have binary packages to fall back to on restarting, I
think that's an okay price to pay. Especially since it happens early
enough in the process and avoids potential problems that are only
noticed at the beginning of stage2.

Oh, and if updating the seed stage fails... it was only rebuilding gcc
dependencies anyway. That's not so bad at all. (I don't care about
custom update commands and isn't something that we can fix)

> As I said, the only proper fix is to update the toolchain to EAPI5.  We
> could live in the dark ages forever, but I really don't think it helps
> anyone.

That seems like a potentially good long term goal, but isn't something
that we can force through.