Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] prefix portage chaining

[Ned Ludd]

On Thu, 2009-03-26 at 08:26 +0100, Markus Duft wrote:
> On Wed, 2009-03-25 at 11:44 -0700, Ned Ludd wrote:
> [snip]
> >
> >
> > While much of what you are talking about here mainly applies to prefix,
> > it looks to me from glancing over the code that you might of solved a
> > long standing problem in the embedded world with cross compiling via
> > portage. 222895  If that is the case, then I owe you a beer. one about
> > the size of a keg.
> >
>
> lol, thx for the beer ;)
>
> hmm... looking over that patch again, the only EPREFIX dependent thing
> is, that i'm removing EPREFIX from the vartree class again :) so this
> should pretty much plain apply to main too, and simply work. you may
> want to rename READONLY_EPREFIX to READONLY_ROOT, but thats it :)
>
> the other stuff besides portage modification (baselayout patchery, etc.
> is prefix specific again, so all you'd need is the portage changes.
>
> if you will try it, please let me know if it worked :) with the attached
> patch "sed -i -e 's,READONLY_EPREFIX,READONLY_ROOT,g'", and applying to
> an installed /usr/lib/portage should enable you to do it.
> (backup /usr/lib/portage - i trust my work, but... we never know for
> sure :))
>
> then add to make.conf: READONLY_ROOT=/my/other/root:DEPEND
>
> i hope this is what you where looking for...! and i hope it doesn't
> somehow clash with the existing cross compile logic in portage regarding
> where to merge to...
>
> Cheers, Markus


patch failed a few hunks for me on ~arch vanilla-portage. I did point
out the patch to one of the gentoo embedded/openmoko guys. Think they
will be the most eager to test this.

In our case if the code did work out whatever you call READONLY_ROOT we
would probably need to expand to allow for more that one ROOT if it has
to be defined in the parent /etc/make.conf


-- 
Ned Ludd <solar@g.o>
Gentoo Linux