| 1 |
On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 09:39 -0800, Brian Harring wrote: |
| 2 |
> Automation can reduce workload, within limits. Fex, scripting for |
| 3 |
> yanking packages/deptree out of normal tree for merging into a g19 |
| 4 |
> tree. |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Exactly, though I am not sure GLEP19 is the right way to go anyway, as |
| 7 |
it still put a decent additional load on ebuild developers. |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> Hell, script work that needs be done, nothing has been done in that |
| 10 |
> direction either- again, specifics haven't been stated, so there isn't |
| 11 |
> anything to contribute on. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
That is the primary thing my proposal aims to solve... to give people |
| 14 |
something to work on. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
> > Truthfully, for any "large" enterprise, the company will be maintaining |
| 17 |
> > a fair number of their own packages, with custom patches and whatnot. |
| 18 |
> > Where I work, we use Red Hat Enterprise Linux. Why? Because we can pay |
| 19 |
> > for support. That isn't the point I am going to make here, however. We |
| 20 |
> > also have to maintain several hundred RPM packages that either are not |
| 21 |
> > included in RHEL or modified by us in some way. What this means is we |
| 22 |
> > are now in the business of maintaining a package set, using arguably |
| 23 |
> > inferior tools versus ebuilds and portage. The binary support in |
| 24 |
> > portage does make it very possible to "build once, deploy everywhere" |
| 25 |
> > quite easily. |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> The binary support is a bit weak- realistically, for a binpkg distro |
| 28 |
> based off of gentoo, it would need a bit of an enema to improve it. |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> So... consider that a statement of "proposals welcome on how to |
| 31 |
> improve it". Right now, since (same with ebuild support) the format |
| 32 |
> is effectively hardcoded into portage, it's hard to replace/make large |
| 33 |
> changes to binpkg format. Abstraction work has/is underway to resolve |
| 34 |
> that (something that help would be appreciated on also). |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Perhaps a good explanation of the binpkg format would be in order to |
| 37 |
give us a chance to determine what could/should be changed? |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
-- |
| 40 |
Chris Gianelloni |
| 41 |
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead |
| 42 |
x86 Architecture Team |
| 43 |
Games - Developer |
| 44 |
Gentoo Linux |
Archives