Gentoo Archives: gentoo-osx

From: Kito <kito@g.o>
To: gentoo-osx@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-osx] On keywording ppc-macos
Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2005 15:15:23
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-osx] On keywording ppc-macos by Finn Thain
On Aug 24, 2005, at 9:57 AM, Finn Thain wrote:

> On Wed, 24 Aug 2005, Kito wrote: > >> >> On Aug 24, 2005, at 3:51 AM, Finn Thain wrote: >> >>> >>> On Wed, 24 Aug 2005, Finn Thain wrote: >>> >>>> On Tue, 23 Aug 2005, Kito wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Aug 23, 2005, at 12:30 PM, Grobian wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On a somewhat related note, we need to decide sooner than later on >>>>> how distinguish between the collision-protect and >>>>> non-collision-protected profiles in ebuilds, as some things that >>>>> are getting in the tree break with a proper gentoo environment, >>>>> mostly auto{conf,make} issues at the moment (-a -c -f stuff, >>>>> etc) , >>>>> as well as python issues creeping up as well, but this will >>>>> probably get more convoluted very shortly... >>> >>> [snip] >>>> >>>> Now, if an ebuild needs to know that it has "2nd class" status, >>>> wouldn't a use flag be appropriate? And if you were to implement >>>> such >>>> a use flag, could it not be useful to other second-class citizens? >>>> For example, in "portage for non-Gentoo Linux" or "portage for >>>> solaris" profiles. >>> >>> Actually, such a use flag is probably redundant. Isn't that what the >>> the "macos" in "ppc-macos" is for? >> >> Well, thats part of the problem. As Darwin is not self-hosting >> currently, it requires a highly modified OS X environment(read: >> progressive profile) to built it, and the progressive profile >> shares the >> same keyword, *-macos, with the collision-protected profile. Another >> keyword isn't really feasible, I was thinking more along the lines >> of a >> variable added to the use-expand list in the profiles. > > I just read > > What did happen to GLEP 22? > > I have to say, I find the idea of over-loading the collision- > protect hack > with new macos-specific meaning inside N different ebuilds (by > FEATURES > expansion) quite unpleasant. > > To my mind, progressive implies keyword=ppc-darwin/ppc-od, and "2nd > class" > implies ppc-macos and that implies a prefix (substitute x86 or x64 > for ppc > as you see fit). > > 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. Even once prefixed installs are available I intend to continue development in this area to facilitate extremely minimal OS X installs for specialized applications. --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 Finn Thain <fthain@××××××××××××××××.au>