Gentoo Archives: gentoo-osx

From: Nick Dimiduk <ndimiduk@g.o>
To: gentoo-osx@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-osx] on stable and unstable ppc-macos
Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2005 15:23:35
Message-Id: 4319BFCC.3030904@gentoo.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-osx] on stable and unstable ppc-macos by Grobian
1 Grobian wrote:
2 > From a freshly reported bug:
3 Bug # may be useful just to serve as a reference.
4
5 > Reproducible: Always
6 > Steps to Reproduce:
7 > 1. Install gentoo for OSX and not be perfectly comfortable you did it
8 > right.
9 Not comfortable with the install? Are our docs outdated or ambiguous?
10
11 > 2. Add ~ppc-macos to the keywords for the mediawiki-1.4.9.ebuild.
12 > 3. ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~ppc-macos" emerge mediawiki
13 No problem so far.
14
15 > Here is where I want the discussion to start. I myself would have done
16 > it exact the same way, and I see it happen a lot. In fact, I even think
17 > this is the way the Gentoo docs advocate the use of ~arch.
18 Is the goal to test out an unkeyworded ebuild for keywording/porting?
19 This looks like a good way to go for that purpose.
20
21 > In a recent discussion I found out this is, however, not the way some
22 > other people see the use of ~arch. Instead they assume your whole
23 > system is ~arch.
24 Indeed, mine is a ~ppc-macos portage system.
25
26 > This very bug reported might be fixed if the whole system would be
27 > ~ppc-macos, however, the user doesn't want that. Instead, the user
28 > wants to use an unstable package, to have a very isolated case, where an
29 > unstable package lives as a stable one.
30 What is the bug, exactly? If they're trying to run an ~arch package on
31 an arch system, this is how you do it. There will likely be
32 dependencies to also be pulled from ~arch, but portage handles that AFAIK.
33
34 > My opinion here is that there is something wrong if portage isn't able
35 > to tell what it needs to run a package in ~ppc-macos. Maybe this is not
36 > easily fixable, and should we do some extra hacks to make the two worlds
37 > play nice again. However, I don't think having a fully ~arch system is
38 > equal to a user that runs a stable system and wants to grab one package
39 > from the unstable branch. I consider the first case to be 'progressive'
40 > (not in the ppc-macos sense) or 'bleeding edge' while the latter case is
41 > more realistic and what happens in real life: 'controlled risk'.
42 Portage should handle this. As I understand it, portage doesn't care
43 too much about arch/~arch. The KEYWORD just sets up some default
44 packages masks, if you will, from which it can draw from known packages
45 and their dependencies. When you get down to installing a package
46 (regardless of keyword), portage makes sure the system and ebuild
47 keywords match and then it starts building the dependency tree. The
48 same checks must be made for each dep. If it was called something like
49 # ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~arch" emerge foo/bar then for that run or portage,
50 the system _is_ an ~arch system, meaning all deps will be pulled from
51 ~arch. I'm not sure how it handles entries in the package.keywords
52 file. The behavior may be different; feel free to chime in, anyone who
53 knows.
54
55 Be careful about your terms here. We currently have a use for the term
56 "progressive". I believe I understand what you're saying about
57 controlled risk; don't know if it would confuse anyone else.
58
59 > I like to straighten out this issue, so everyone knows what should be
60 > done or not be done. I just assumed the only vision I knew was what
61 > everyone has in mind, and this appears not to be like this. I think
62 > it's directly related to QA and I feel my actions largely depend on it.
63 > So, until I know what I'm doing is right or wrong, I won't do anything.
64 I'm afraid I don't understand what (if anything) needs to be done. Care
65 to elaborate?
66
67 -Nick Dimiduk
68 --
69 gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-osx] on stable and unstable ppc-macos Grobian <grobian@g.o>
Re: [gentoo-osx] on stable and unstable ppc-macos Finn Thain <fthain@××××××××××××××××.au>