| 1 |
Stuart Herbert wrote: [Mon Jun 07 2004, 08:12:12AM EDT] |
| 2 |
> How are the different userlands of 'gnu' and 'bsd' to be kept apart? |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> I'm wondering whether what we actually need here are separate trees, rather |
| 5 |
> than keywords. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
I'm pretty sure we don't need separate trees. In fact, I would like to |
| 8 |
do everything possible to prevent having separate trees, since separate |
| 9 |
trees make maintenance much more difficult. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Here's how I envision incorporating a BSD userland (and the proof-of- |
| 12 |
concept system I put together many months ago seems to work). |
| 13 |
The default userland tools would be specified in profile/packages, in |
| 14 |
practice either specifying a *BSD base system or the normal GNU tools. |
| 15 |
Also, profile/make.defaults would set USERLAND="BSD" in cases where a |
| 16 |
BSD userland should be the default. That way ebuilds can check the |
| 17 |
value of ${USERLAND}, so that in cases such as GNU sed, make, tar, |
| 18 |
etcetera (some of which need to be in all system profiles so that |
| 19 |
Portage can function) the ebuild can run ./configure with an option to |
| 20 |
prepend a "g" to the names of the tools, preventing the GNU tools from |
| 21 |
clobbering the BSD tools. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Sound reasonable? Am I missing something obvious? |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Best, |
| 26 |
g2boojum |
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Grant Goodyear |
| 29 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 30 |
g2boojum@g.o |
| 31 |
http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum |
| 32 |
GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0 9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76 |
Archives