Gentoo Archives: gentoo-osx

From: Lina Pezzella <J4rg0n@g.o>
To: gentoo-osx@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-osx] Re: [RFC] Separate alt-prefix repo for base-system packages.
Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2005 19:32:08
Message-Id: 293C7CB5-0385-44E0-BB92-80475D44473E@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-osx] Re: [RFC] Separate alt-prefix repo for base-system packages. by Kito
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


On Aug 30, 2005, at 11:01 AM, Kito wrote:

> Maybe so, but we can't have one without the other. First get > packages to install in a prefix, then work up from there.
Amen. If we start really big here, we're just going to end up talking about this for months and never get anything done. Perhaps we could agree to work on getting packages to install in a prefix firstly and develop a procedure for making that happen. I see the rest of the issues in this thread as separate, even though they are related.
> The issue of leveraging existing packages is currently handled by > package.provided, which we all know doesn't really serve our > purposes, but I see no reason work couldn't be done in parallel on > these issues...
Exactly. Since the solution to this problem seems to be the crux of the discussion here, perhaps we could split this thread and continue the discussion about alternatives to package.provided in a new thread while working out a procedure for installing to a prefix simultaneously. - --Lina Pezzella Ebuild & Porting Co-Lead Gentoo for OS X -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (Darwin) iD8DBQFDGejjNJ9STR9DbYERAsFlAJwJHdtzCo6BRFIZGfWkkjv8gT2t1wCbBWcX /k91HnML1Hw66Ijj6itlmsU= =p6es -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list