| 1 |
On 11/13/2014 08:01 PM, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Thu, Nov 13, 2014 at 9:38 PM, Michael Palimaka <kensington@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On 14/11/14 11:06, Rich Freeman wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> |
| 5 |
>>> Well, the idea would be to maintain the virtual INSTEAD of @system, or |
| 6 |
>>> have @system just pull in the virtual and make some arch-specific |
| 7 |
>>> additions. |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> Will that work? Some profiles remove packages from the base @system and |
| 10 |
>> replace it with their own implementations (eg. BSD). |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Maybe. The thing is that a package either depends on something or it |
| 13 |
> doesn't. If it really does depend on something, then the fact that it |
| 14 |
> isn't available on BSD/etc isn't going to magically make the package |
| 15 |
> work. We just loosely define system dependencies in a way that makes |
| 16 |
> them work 98% of the time, basically accepting that things are going |
| 17 |
> to break and we get away with it because few of our users actually run |
| 18 |
> on BSD/etc. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> If it is just a matter of preference then a profile could install an |
| 21 |
> alternative package that is in a virtual. However, this won't work if |
| 22 |
> everybody still uses some convenience virtual that pulls in bash/etc |
| 23 |
> and the BSD folks don't want to install bash unnecessarily. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Maybe I'm missing something, but if you are using virtuals, then you can |
| 26 |
make the deps conditional on profile forced/masked flags like |
| 27 |
userland_BSD and userland_GNU if necessary. These behave like normal USE |
| 28 |
flags, aside from the fact the they are forced or masked by profiles. |
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
Thanks, |
| 31 |
Zac |
Archives