Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: flameeyes@gmail.com (Diego 'Flameeyes' =?utf-8?Q?Petten=C3=B2?=)
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Reducing the size of the system package set
Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 11:34:39
Message-Id: m2fxx8a6vj.fsf@gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] [RFC] Reducing the size of the system package set by Donnie Berkholz
1 Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@g.o> writes:
2
3 > What is your goal? Is there something you're trying to accomplish that's
4 > impossible? It's clear that changing this would be a fair amount of
5 > work, and I don't understand the benefits.
6
7 With the current size of system packages set, having a complete deptree
8 is impossible. You're one of the main followers of the idea that if a
9 package is in system you don't have to depend on it, and I already
10 talked to you about the problems there are with emerge -e world when for
11 instance zlib is broken.
12
13 So my goals are:
14 - have a deptree as complete as possible;
15 - being able to have an emerge -e world that actually builds first the
16 stuff that's going to be needed (zlib before packages using zlib);
17 - avoid overriding the system package set in profiles like embedded
18 where stuff like autoconf and perl might not be wanted on the resulting
19 filesystem.
20
21 The first goal is a prerequisite if we want to move to other stuff like
22 a true multilib-handling package manager (we don't want to force down
23 the users' throats multiple copies of autoconf, considering it's a
24 script, do we?) or proper cross-building environments.
25
26 --
27 Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò
28 http://farragut.flameeyes.is-a-geek.org/

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [RFC] Reducing the size of the system package set "Santiago M. Mola" <coldwind@g.o>