Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [GLEP] RFC - Keywording scheme

[Fabian Groffen]

Hi Grant, Rémi and Yuri,

On 25-04-2007 20:30:45 -0500, Yuri Vasilevski wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Apr 2007 23:39:47 +0200
> Rémi Cardona <remi@g.o> wrote:
>
> > Grant Goodyear a écrit :
> > > Fabian Groffen wrote: [Sat Apr 14 2007, 03:33:03AM CDT]
> > >> For people that like reading it in html or via the web:
> > >> http://dev.gentoo.org/~grobian/gleps/glep-keywords.html
> > >> http://dev.gentoo.org/~grobian/gleps/glep-keywords.txt
> > >
> > > So what would a version of Gentoo for amd64 based on FreeBSD but
> > > using glibc be called?  (It's not an entirely academic question;
> > > Debian folks have worked on such a distribution for some time.)
> > > I can't really tell from the text in your proposed GLEP.
> >
> > I'm sure this GLEP can be extended later on should anyone feel like
> > doing a glibc-based freebsd port of gentoo (hurts my brains just
> > writing this :) )
>
> I think it will be better if this scheme is specified in friendlier
> way for future expansions, hence I this it should be more flexible.
>
> I would propose this two modifications:

[snip]

> So to give more examples,
>
> A package that can only be build on arm, sparc and x86 with linux and
> glibc or arm with uclibc can be specified as:
> "{arm,sparc,x86}:linux:glibc arm:uclibc"
>
> A package (lets say linux-headers) that makes sense on all systems that
> support linux and only them can be specified as:
> "linux"

[snip]

While I agree that you could be much more explicit in addressing the
exact thing that you're dealing with, I chose not to.  The rationale
here is that the added complexity, as well as the added fine-grained
granularity is not necessary for at least now and what I would expect
from the reasonable future.

So in Grant's case, I would like to highlight that the right-hand field
of the keyword is an OS thing, not a kernel nor a userland.  The reason
for this, is that it allows some freedom in what you consider to be OS
X (Not the Macintosh thing here).  I'm not too familiar with FreeBSD and
it's flavours, so I'll talk about Solaris here.  The SunOS kernel has
these days a few incarnations.  OpenSolaris, Solaris, Nexenta...
For what we do, it seems that even though Nexenta has a GNU-based
userland, we can still address it in the same way as we can do for
Solaris, hence we don't need something special there.  If we would, we
could make a keyword.  Often times the setting of ELIBC and KERNEL helps
us to make the real decision where we need it (e.g. virtual/libintl),
which is set in the profiles, unrelated to the keyword.


-- 
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level

-- 
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list