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 13:58:46
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-osx] On keywording ppc-macos by Finn Thain
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 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


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-osx] On keywording ppc-macos Finn Thain <fthain@××××××××××××××××.au>