1 |
On 21-01-2022 11:29:54 +0100, Peter Böhm wrote: |
2 |
> Dear Developers, |
3 |
> |
4 |
> I like your goal to make Gentoo more user-friendly but Gentoo is a source |
5 |
> based distribution and I dont like binary versions as a default. My question |
6 |
> is: |
7 |
> |
8 |
> Who has problems with "big" packages like rust or firefox ? |
9 |
> |
10 |
> Only User which doesnt know there is a binary version. So, in every case we |
11 |
> need to describe it in our AMD64 handbook. |
12 |
> |
13 |
> Am Freitag, 21. Januar 2022, 10:22:14 CET schrieb Mart Raudsepp: |
14 |
> > Anyhow, my vote is to default to rust-bin - people can easily be told |
15 |
> > to move to dev-lang/rust at their convenience and then explicitly |
16 |
> > depclean rust-bin. |
17 |
> |
18 |
> I am dreaming about another solution where this is not needed: |
19 |
> |
20 |
> In our /etc/portage/make.conf we can have a new: |
21 |
> |
22 |
> MAKEBIN="rust firefox" |
23 |
> |
24 |
> ... resulting in an automatic switch to the binary version of all included |
25 |
> packages ... of course this is also as recommendation in our AMD64 handbook |
26 |
> (with a clue to delete it if not desired). |
27 |
|
28 |
or ... if we could have Portage check the requirements for building a |
29 |
package, and if it cannot be met, that it tries to resolve the || case, |
30 |
which would be the -bin variant in this case. |
31 |
|
32 |
Not sure if the information is available to Portage at dependency |
33 |
resolution time though. |
34 |
|
35 |
Fabian |
36 |
|
37 |
> |
38 |
> Kind reagards, |
39 |
> Peter |
40 |
> |
41 |
> |
42 |
> |
43 |
> |
44 |
|
45 |
-- |
46 |
Fabian Groffen |
47 |
Gentoo on a different level |