Re: [gentoo-dev] Proposed changes to base profile for Gentoo/ALT

[Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò]

On Wednesday 02 November 2005 15:38, Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > -*app-arch/tar
> put '-*app-arch/tar' into your packages
I'm still thinking for the eselect-able tar command and virtual/tar, as long 
as they are syntax-compatible (bsdtar and gnutar are compatible).

> > -*sys-process/procps
> err, this isnt linux specific ... it is ported to other systems (like
> FreeBSD)
FreeBSD provide its own ways for these commands, and it will collides with 
base system commands. Also, the FreeBSD versions uses libkvm to get data and 
are usually faster/safer.

> > -*sys-apps/shadow
> this should be prob turned into a virtual instead
I'd say so.

> > -*sys-apps/which
> this isnt linux-specific
GNU specific, FreeBSD and NetBSD does not require this, have their own 
versions. It's not masked, as the newer versions should install as gwhich, 
but it's also not a requirement.

> > -*sys-fs/e2fsprogs
> this should be prob turned into a virtual instead
Not sure about this, as there are packages that uses the library provided by 
this (not only libcom_err and libss, but the rest), but then it has the base 
mkfs/fsck utils for base linux system, but not needed by BSD.
A virtual might work, yeah.

> > -*sys-libs/cracklib
> we can prob punt this since shadow has a hard dep on it anyways ...
Right.

> > -*virtual/modutils
> FreeBSD doesnt support kernel modules ?
Not with the same ideas of Linux. There's no "extra" package for this, the 
commands are in the base system. Yeah we can probably set the PROVIDE and the 
virtual but... do we *really* need to add the dep on the virtual for every 
port? I'd think that just Linux has reasons of having this (as other system 
has no alternatives), so no reason to let the other systems resolve an extra 
virtual...

-- 
Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/
Gentoo/ALT lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE