1 |
On 03/28/12 10:24, Kent Fredric wrote: |
2 |
>> |
3 |
>> Just use categories from repos? |
4 |
>> |
5 |
>> /usr/portage/distfiles/sys-devel/gcc-1.2.tar.bz2 |
6 |
>> /usr/portage/distfiles/sys-libs/glibc-2.3.tar.bz2 |
7 |
>> /usr/portage/distfiles/sys-libs/zlib-3.4.tar.bz2 |
8 |
>> /usr/portage/distfiles/zomg-soft/zomgawesomesoft-5.3.1.tar.xz |
9 |
>> (from zomg repo with custom zomg-soft category ;) |
10 |
>> |
11 |
>> Btw. what would happen if, ie. mc package - well, two different |
12 |
>> packages, one from app-misc, one from sci-libs - but lets say they have |
13 |
>> a brand new release 5.0 and there's mc-5.0.tar.bz2 for both of them? |
14 |
>> |
15 |
> |
16 |
> Yeah, as admittedly rare as that might be, thats why I didn't suggest |
17 |
> grouping by category =) |
18 |
|
19 |
This could cause problems for people using crossdev, because it relies |
20 |
on overlays to work. If crossdev were to use symlinks, using |
21 |
`eclean-dist -df` to remove things that are not needed by the main tree |
22 |
could delete the targets of the symlinks. Hard links would work around |
23 |
this, but then the distfiles for everything would need to be in the same |
24 |
file system and that file system would need to support hard links. |
25 |
|
26 |
The general sentiment that I have seen from Gentoo developers on IRC is |
27 |
that overlays are bad and that they are meant for things that will |
28 |
eventually be merged into the main tree. With that in mind, I am not |
29 |
convinced that this is a problem worth fixing. The overlay owner is |
30 |
supposed to prepare his things for inclusion into the main tree, so he |
31 |
should handle it. |