Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] The merge of emerde with emerge

[Alpt]

On Wed, Dec 01, 2004 at 10:37:22PM +0000, Luke-Jr after a spiritual call wrote  :
~> > okey, install it in slackware then and use it. let me see please.
~> 
~> There's no purpose. If you want to use Portage, you might as well use Gentoo. 
~> I see no reason why it shouldn't work, though.

portage != Gentoo. Or am I wrong?
There are plenty of reason... they are even too obvious

~> > > > tgz support: A  tgzfile must be a Slackware pkg. Emerde will resolve
~> > > >  the tgz's dependences and will install it.
~> 
~> Inject stuff. I don't see RPM installing DEB, tgz, or ebuilds.
...
~> You're saying Portage isn't Slackware compatible because you define Slackware 
~> to be non-Portage.

the tgz support means that if you install a tgz with emerde, you'll have
all the dep checking using the pordb. It's very useful to manage the
tgzs. They don't have dependences checking. So, if you install emerde in
Slackware it's welcomed. 
This is the same for rpm, and deb. Having a unified packet manager isn't
a bad idea. Moreover the tgz/deb/rpm are binary pkg, so they can be used
if the user doesn't want to compile. 
(i'm not saying it's good to don't compile)

~> Nope... In fact, I can change my USE and it will still output the same stuff 
~> since it doesn't recompile anything. A bug, but it doesn't annoy me enough.
????
In the current portage every time src_compile is called, econf is
called, so ./configure is called again, and then make will start from
the very first source!

~> > > > initd-cfg: /etc/init.d editor.
~> > >
~> > > Doesn't belong in a package manager.
~> >
~> > you are managing the init.d files of the packages installed with the
~> > package manager
~> 
~> Shall we include editors for all the other possible configuration files 
~> Portage packages install too?

So, Do we need ufed? No, we don't cause it's so simply to live without
it.
Did you actually see initd-cfg?

~> > ~> Portage is already distro-independent... The only distros to have
~> > considered ~> using it (Zynot and Utopios) both determined that it would be
~> > better to write ~> a better package manager based on the ideas.
~> >
~> > Install it in the other distro then. Did you considered for example
~> > baselayout?
~> 
~> Inject baselayout.
It's not so simple.
You have to install rc-scripts for example. (but you don't have to install it
completely.)

~> On Wednesday 01 December 2004 9:14 pm, Colin Kingsley wrote:
~> > > Portage is already distro-independent... The only distros to have
~> > > considered using it (Zynot and Utopios) both determined that it would be
~> > > better to write a better package manager based on the ideas.
~> >
~> > hmmm.... So portage is universal enough, yet other distro's have
~> > decided to write their own package manager?
~> 
~> It'll work on systems w/o any changes, but that doesn't mean it works well. 
~> There are numerous flaws in the design of Portage that cannot simply be 
~> "fixed."

"that doesn't mean it works well" == "it messes up the system"
So you are saying that the portage is cursed to be in the eternity
blinded with gentoo. nice.

~> > No it doesn't. He means that a compile would be resumed from where
~> > ever it left off, as if you were doing ./configure && make && make
~> > install  style compilation. Currently, portage will pick up from the
~> > beginning of the package that was being compiled when it died.
~> 
~> Continues from where it left off for me. Possibly related to keeptemp or 
~> keepwork.

read above ^

ah, I forgot to say that there's also this:
The E_INFODIR, E_LOCALSTATEDIR, E_MANDIR, E_SYSCONFDIR, E_DATADIR options was added
in make.conf. With these the user can choose the destination dirs of thepackages 
being installed.

-- 
:wq!
"I don't know nothing" The One Who reached the Thinking Matter   '.'

[ Alpt --- Freaknet Medialab ]
[ GPG Key ID 441CF0EE ]
[ Key fingerprint = 8B02 26E8 831A 7BB9 81A9  5277 BFF8 037E 441C F0EE ]

--
gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list