1 |
On Saturday 29 July 2006 02:19, Alastair Tse wrote: |
2 |
> On Fri, 2006-07-28 at 11:51 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
3 |
> > Robert Cernansky wrote: |
4 |
> > > If I have some application that is not included in portage why |
5 |
> > > I decide to make an ebuild? Because I hope that then it will be |
6 |
> > > accepted and included to portage, so maintained by developers (big |
7 |
> > > thanks for this). If I have to take care of package + ebuild + |
8 |
> > > dependencies, I'll rather choose not to make an ebulid but compile |
9 |
> > > package right from .tar.gz archive. |
10 |
> > |
11 |
> > Many people disagree with you here, that's why overlays exist. Somebody |
12 |
> > wants to use Portage to manage ebuilds that aren't yet in the actual |
13 |
> > tree. |
14 |
> |
15 |
> I have to say I agree with Donnie here on this. |
16 |
> |
17 |
> I've been using private ebuilds for certain things that are installed on |
18 |
> my work systems that will never be applicable to anyone except for 4 |
19 |
> people on this planet. Yet I use these because then I'm able to take |
20 |
> this simple single file, plonk it into another Gentoo machine and |
21 |
> recreate the same installation. Maybe it is just because making ebuilds |
22 |
> is now just second nature to me. |
23 |
|
24 |
I, as a simple user, also have my overlay, with ebuilds for software I use (at |
25 |
work also company-internal software), some driver that's not in portage, and |
26 |
whatever I need. |
27 |
Big advantage of using ebuilds with portage over manually installing from |
28 |
tarballs is visible at update/uninstall time when old files should get |
29 |
deleted! Ebuild that fetch source from revision system (cvs, svn) are very |
30 |
useful too as recompiling is then as easy as typing "emerge <mysoftware>". |
31 |
|
32 |
Ease of installation on second box comes on second position. |
33 |
|
34 |
> Look at my overlay at the moment, half the stuff there have a less than |
35 |
> 30% chance of ever making it into the main portage tree. But I still |
36 |
> make those ebuilds in the off chance that either (a) I do decide to put |
37 |
> them in, or (b) someone else might stumble across them and find it, and |
38 |
> (c) there are just things that I cannot test because I don't have the |
39 |
> hardware. |
40 |
|
41 |
Through proxy-dev I may contribute ebuild for a few packages and maintain them |
42 |
over the time period I have use for them. E.g. drivers as long as I have |
43 |
given hardware (in use). |
44 |
|
45 |
What would be useful is to have the option for a few users to maintain the |
46 |
same ebuild through one proxy-dev, this way when one user stops having |
47 |
usecase for the ebuild others can continue maintainership. Even maintaining |
48 |
while initial user lacks of time or is away would then not stop or fallback |
49 |
to the dev. |
50 |
|
51 |
Regards, |
52 |
Bruno |
53 |
-- |
54 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |