Gentoo Archives: gentoo-osx

From: Finn Thain <fthain@××××××××××××××××.au>
To: gentoo-osx@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-osx] On keywording ppc-macos
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2005 15:22:52
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-osx] On keywording ppc-macos by Kito
On Wed, 24 Aug 2005, Kito wrote:

> >I don't think it likely that apple will open source Mac OS X (or > >eleven, or even system seven). I mean, is it likely that a macos > >profile could ever be anything but second fiddle? > > The progressive profile already is, and getting moreso as it matures. > fex it can/will be used to merge macos components from Apple > installation media. So it is in fact handling the compilation of the > 'bsd' portion of OS X from source as well as managing the proprietary > libs and tools like CoreAudio, XCode, etc. This way, packages can do > things like "DEPEND='>=dev-util/xcode2.1 > >=media-sound/coreaudio'" and so on. So used in this manner, portage is > anything but a second class citizen as everything in / is in fact > managed by portage.
What I'm saying is that you cannot build Mac OS X, Apple will not permit that. If you wan't to install X Code, you have to script apple's installer to do it. That is 2nd fiddle.
> Even once prefixed installs are available I intend to continue > development in this area to facilitate extremely minimal OS X installs > for specialized applications.
I applaud this. But I think calling that profile "macos" is a misnomer. That's why I suggested calling upstream darwin, "ppc-darwin". The fact that it isn't called macos doesn't imply macos and macos packages cannot be supported on it. -f
> --Kito > > > > >-f > > > > > > > > > > > > >I suspect the whole question goes away when portage gets prefixes. So my > > > >post was probably just noise. Sorry. > > > > > > > >-f > > > >-- > > > >gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list > > > > > > > > > > > >-- > >gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list > > > >
-- gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-osx] On keywording ppc-macos Kito <kito@g.o>