Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Kristian Fiskerstrand <k_f@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: go packages vs repositories
Date: Fri, 12 Jun 2015 20:03:29
Message-Id: 557B3AE1.9020301@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: go packages vs repositories by William Hubbs
1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
2 Hash: SHA512
3
4 On 06/12/2015 09:58 PM, William Hubbs wrote:
5 > On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 11:18:29AM -0700, Patrick McLean wrote:
6 >> On Fri, 12 Jun 2015 12:54:04 -0500 William Hubbs
7 >> <williamh@g.o> wrote:
8
9
10 ..
11
12 > Since the Go compiler bundles all the necessary packages to compile
13 > a go binary, I can't help but wonder if we really need manual
14 > snapshots of packages that build only *.a files in the tree?
15 >
16 > Thoughts?
17 >
18
19 It gets even worse if you factor in security. With the static linking
20 you really need a := dependency on all libraries used as you don't
21 know whether an update is security related.
22
23 That said, I understand the structure. I don't like it, but I
24 understand it, given that it is primarily only intended to be used
25 within container/docker environments.
26
27 Good luck trying to get it to play nice with a package manager though...
28
29 - --
30 Kristian Fiskerstrand
31 Public PGP key 0xE3EDFAE3 at hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net
32 fpr:94CB AFDD 3034 5109 5618 35AA 0B7F 8B60 E3ED FAE3
33 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
34
35 iQEcBAEBCgAGBQJVezrYAAoJECULev7WN52FtWYH/i2nPEWAcUHjYP/i9DYqbrzJ
36 pHFub2zZrdCyIqF0n/aYVtgdcU+uXz/iHD/+j/SaIVaGgWBO5kafqEt93Zyw2i4I
37 yHWzZp5cUWMt4YfUBq63ZBGWQkaK4YsbP9TmuuUGe5ZhuOHBQhKtenue0VBqQ6Bl
38 tiYZcByCFJ8HHeshCGdr0unAA8K85vIIaDdz/FkkA2rwlFudIWAfgaWhomc60oAV
39 9aVKllOpqWsIoWn6GYKGuidSWmXMmN6J7EPyGENJENf01oF3Q/D7H5o3IN2uIB7m
40 FUXtmdPji3eSS77mpyimh4xXi6fzy1x3kWGhmPHBo1PMDdaY9S/mKjy85NS5z2U=
41 =hT4l
42 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: go packages vs repositories William Hubbs <williamh@g.o>