Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: "William L. Thomson Jr." <wlt-ml@××××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Prevent binary/non-compiled packages from binary package creation
Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2017 17:23:15
Message-Id: assp.03939f689e.20170808132301.2dbdab6b@o-sinc.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Prevent binary/non-compiled packages from binary package creation by Kristian Fiskerstrand
1 On Tue, 8 Aug 2017 19:11:18 +0200
2 Kristian Fiskerstrand <k_f@g.o> wrote:
3
4 > On 08/08/2017 06:37 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote:
5 > > I make a lot of binaries for use on other systems, to expedite
6 > > updates. It does not make sense for some packages to ever be a
7 > > binary package.
8 >
9 > Any particular reason this decision shouldn't be left to the operator
10 > of the binhost rather than the package maintainer?
11
12 Can you think of any? I cannot see any operator wanting a binary of a
13 binary, or a package of sources. When they already have a sources
14 tarball. Maybe in the case of shipping binaries without sources. But I
15 am not sure if an binary ebuild ignores SRC_URI entirely.
16
17 I think moving binaries without needing the distfiles would be the
18 only reason why an operator may prefer binaries of stuff that does not
19 get compiled, just installed.
20
21 > it can already be controlled through env files.
22
23 I was thinking it might, but having used them to skip other hooks. I
24 was thinking they could not be used as such for binary packages. Have
25 you confirmed such is possible? Could you provide a link or example?
26 Thanks!
27
28
29 --
30 William L. Thomson Jr.

Replies