1 |
Thanks for the reply Grobian. |
2 |
|
3 |
|
4 |
As far as I know, this path is envisioned but since I needs some large |
5 |
> investments, there is not much to tell about when this is to come. It |
6 |
> is in the line of development, however. |
7 |
> |
8 |
> To give you another 302, you might look around in the gentoo-portage |
9 |
> list, because there this idea will be cooked. We OSXers will probably |
10 |
> be the first ones to consume (use) it. |
11 |
|
12 |
|
13 |
Yes, I have posted there yesterday, got redirected here, browsed around the |
14 |
archives of osx and found some links back to dev "new glep draft: Portage as |
15 |
a secondary package manager" (posted in may). This is what I want, and |
16 |
wasn't sure if osx was pushing for this or the main portage devs were |
17 |
driving this initiative (if anyone is). |
18 |
|
19 |
According to you it would be developed in the main line, and osx will use |
20 |
it, rather than osx developing it and pushing it back? I'm looking to get |
21 |
some direction in this as I have a week or so to see if I can do anything |
22 |
viable in that time, but would like some direction (am proficient in bash |
23 |
and python but I'm not a portage developer just a longtime satisfied gentoo |
24 |
consumer ;) ). |
25 |
|
26 |
Maybe this helps a bit |
27 |
|
28 |
|
29 |
Every little bit helps. |
30 |
|
31 |
m h wrote: |
32 |
> > Hello- |
33 |
> > |
34 |
> > I posted in the gentoo-dev mailing list yesterday, but figured I'd post |
35 |
> > here since it is somewhat closer related. I'm investigating the |
36 |
> > differences between portage and openpkg. For those who don't know about |
37 |
> > openpkg, openpkg allows one to install rpms in a sandboxed environment |
38 |
> > accross multiple unix platforms (bsd, redhat, debian, gentoo,...). It |
39 |
> > consists of a way to bootstrap an environment and a bunch of spec files |
40 |
> > used to create rpms specifically tailored for that platform. The idea |
41 |
> > being you could run the "same" components across different platforms in |
42 |
> > your environment. |
43 |
> > |
44 |
> > It seems that Fink and Portage for OSX are providing similar |
45 |
> > functionality on top of OSX. My question is what would be involved in |
46 |
> > generalizing the Portage OSX port to unix platforms similar to what |
47 |
> > openpkg is doing. An example might be that while I need to run Suse at |
48 |
> > work, I could install portage into a sandboxed location and enter that |
49 |
> > environment. This would allow me to run newer components, better |
50 |
> > integrated, security patched, etc, while still having the corporate |
51 |
> > environment if I needed it. |
52 |
> > |
53 |
> > Ideally the benefits for doing this would be to allow many platforms to |
54 |
> > take advantage of portage, use the large ebuild tree (openpkg has ~400 |
55 |
> > components), as well as use ebuilds that are tested probably a little |
56 |
> > bit more than openpkg (I believe the gentoo install base is a least one |
57 |
> > or two orders of magnitude larger than openpkg). |
58 |
> > |
59 |
> > Any thoughts, comments, or suggestions are appreciated. |
60 |
> > |
61 |
> > thanks |
62 |
> > |
63 |
> > matt |
64 |
> |
65 |
> -- |
66 |
> Fabian Groffen |
67 |
> Gentoo for Mac OS X |
68 |
> -- |
69 |
> gentoo-osx@g.o mailing list |
70 |
> |
71 |
> |