Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: prune_libtool_files() and pkg-config dependency

[Gregory M. Turner]

On 8/31/2012 4:48 AM, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 31, 2012 at 6:42 AM, Michał Górny <mgorny@g.o> wrote:
>>
>> So please introduce virtual/compiler, virtual/linker,
>> virtual/posix-system, virtual/sratatata and add them to DEPEND of every
>> single ebuild.
>
> Every ebuild doesn't need all of those - that is the whole point.  As
> Duncan already pointed out, reducing @system is a goal, but it doesn't
> mean that we need to get there overnight.  However, we'll never get
> there if we keep going backwards.

My 2c on this:

I'm reluctant to make "sweeping statements" like this, for any number of 
reasons, but -- well, I'm gonna.

IMO, getting there by slow evolution is not the right way.  At some 
point, @system becomes so primitive that bootstrapping must come to 
depend on more than @system, or we have to add add more "phases" to the 
bootstrap process, or split @system up into smaller sets or something.

The point is, we can't gradually reach a goal that's incompatible with 
the fundamental premise.  It's all well and good to say "let's not put 
more stuff into @system because we want it to shrink," but, as it 
stands, there's a de-facto policy that @system includes everything 
needed to have a reasonably functional Gentoo, including all of the 
compilers, development tools and interpreters portage, gcc, and your rc 
system of choice rely on.  Until that fundamentally changes, IMO what 
belongs in @system is whatever best suits its current purpose.

For the record, I'm not saying we need to put pkgconfig in - I'm totally 
agnostic about that, as I am about whether it should be brought in as a 
dependency.

I just mean, probably the best way to fix the fat-@system problem is to 
create some kind of vision for a more-modular "Gentoo of the Future" 
first, and create a roadmap for getting there, second.

Its possible, perhaps even likely, that if we try to go the incremental 
route towards @system reduction, we will find, along the way, creative 
solutions to the various issues that have kept it fat-ish so far.  But 
that's likely to lead to a fairly ad-hoc patchwork of hacks, which imo 
would most likely be inferior to what could be achieved with some kind 
of destination in mind (even if that destination is subject to major 
revision as Gentoo progress toward it).

-gmt