1 |
Hehe, |
2 |
|
3 |
http://dev.gentoo.org/~antarus/essays/mixin-profiles.txt |
4 |
|
5 |
-rw-r--r-- 1 antarus users 2653 Jun 4 2006 mixin-profiles.txt |
6 |
|
7 |
-A |
8 |
|
9 |
On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 2:40 PM, Peter Hjalmarsson <xake@×××××××××.net> wrote: |
10 |
> mån 2010-03-08 klockan 19:13 +0200 skrev Mart Raudsepp: |
11 |
> |
12 |
>> Instead I think we should be improving "eselect profile" to support |
13 |
>> multiple inheriting /etc/make.profile files in a user friendly fashion, |
14 |
>> and in the end removing 249 subprofiles, instead of adding 28+. |
15 |
>> |
16 |
> |
17 |
> |
18 |
> I vote for this one. A profile being a only contains what is interesting |
19 |
> for that profile, and you can "stash together" some profiles into your |
20 |
> own cocktail. |
21 |
> Yeah, I know it sounds horrible, but it would still be better then to |
22 |
> only be able to focus on one small set. |
23 |
> |
24 |
> For example if I am using the GNOME DE, and have someone other also |
25 |
> using my computer, but who really wants to use KDE. Should I have to |
26 |
> find out what from the KDE profile to enable in my env to make my |
27 |
> GNOME-profile also tingle for KDE? |
28 |
> |
29 |
> I think having a set of "base profiles" for toolchains and alike (i.e. |
30 |
> default, hardened) would be good. Then be able to add for example |
31 |
> desktop/gnome or server and/or selinux profiles on top would be |
32 |
> interesting. This also for maintainers, as for example PeBenito can |
33 |
> focus on the selinux part of the profiles, and do not have to keep up to |
34 |
> date with which hardened-compilers are currently masked/unmasked. |
35 |
> |
36 |
> |
37 |
> |
38 |
> |