1 |
On Aug 24, 2005, at 3:51 AM, Finn Thain wrote: |
2 |
|
3 |
> |
4 |
> On Wed, 24 Aug 2005, Finn Thain wrote: |
5 |
> |
6 |
>> On Tue, 23 Aug 2005, Kito wrote: |
7 |
>> |
8 |
>>> |
9 |
>>> On Aug 23, 2005, at 12:30 PM, Grobian wrote: |
10 |
>>> |
11 |
>>> On a somewhat related note, we need to decide sooner than later |
12 |
>>> on how |
13 |
>>> distinguish between the collision-protect and non-collision- |
14 |
>>> protected |
15 |
>>> profiles in ebuilds, as some things that are getting in the tree |
16 |
>>> break |
17 |
>>> with a proper gentoo environment, mostly auto{conf,make} issues |
18 |
>>> at the |
19 |
>>> moment (-a -c -f stuff, etc) , as well as python issues creeping |
20 |
>>> up as |
21 |
>>> well, but this will probably get more convoluted very shortly... |
22 |
> |
23 |
> [snip] |
24 |
>> |
25 |
>> Now, if an ebuild needs to know that it has "2nd class" status, |
26 |
>> wouldn't a |
27 |
>> use flag be appropriate? And if you were to implement such a use |
28 |
>> flag, |
29 |
>> could it not be useful to other second-class citizens? For |
30 |
>> example, in |
31 |
>> "portage for non-Gentoo Linux" or "portage for solaris" profiles. |
32 |
> |
33 |
> Actually, such a use flag is probably redundant. Isn't that what |
34 |
> the the |
35 |
> "macos" in "ppc-macos" is for? |
36 |
|
37 |
Well, thats part of the problem. As Darwin is not self-hosting |
38 |
currently, it requires a highly modified OS X environment(read: |
39 |
progressive profile) to built it, and the progressive profile shares |
40 |
the same keyword, *-macos, with the collision-protected profile. |
41 |
Another keyword isn't really feasible, I was thinking more along the |
42 |
lines of a variable added to the use-expand list in the profiles. |
43 |
|
44 |
> |
45 |
> I suspect the whole question goes away when portage gets prefixes. |
46 |
> So my |
47 |
> post was probably just noise. Sorry. |
48 |
> |
49 |
> -f |
50 |
> -- |
51 |
> gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list |
52 |
> |
53 |
|
54 |
-- |
55 |
gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list |