Gentoo Archives: gentoo-portage-dev

From: Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@g.o>
To: gentoo-portage-dev@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] portage-ng requirements doc
Date: Fri, 28 Nov 2003 22:25:35
Message-Id: 200311282315.57449.pauldv@gentoo.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-portage-dev] portage-ng requirements doc by Daniel Robbins
1 Below I'll give my shot at it.
2
3 On Friday 28 November 2003 19:55, Daniel Robbins wrote:
4 > architecture requirements:
5 >
6 > 1) facilitate parallel, community development
7 > 2) allow for easy extensibility and new feature additions over time
8 > 3) provide a coherent model for (meta)data representation and storage
9 > 4) will run on a wide variety of systems
10 > 5) will run efficiently even on modest hardware
11 > 6) in as much as possible, encourage and/or enforce the development of
12 > high-quality, versatile and maintainable code
13 > 7) encourage/enforce separation of package metadata from specific build
14 > steps and algorithms
15 > 8) allow for delivery of feature set that meets or exceeds expectations
16 > of existing user community
17 >
18 > design goals:
19 >
20 > 1) reflect the sensibilities of "ports" system designs
21 > 2) provide an easy-to-understand developer API
22 > 3) provide an open, transparent architecture that reflects UNIX design
23 > philosophy
24 > 4) In every way possible, program should be malleable to allow
25 > conformation to user needs and expectations,
26 > both interface as well as the specific actions performed by the program.
27
28 implementation goals:
29 1) Support distfile renaming or distfile subdirectories or both to solve the
30 name-clash problem.
31 2) Support useflag and slot dependencies as layed out by carpaski before and
32 which will probably come into the current portage.
33 3) A full dependency tracker that can use the USEFLAGS from compile-time
34 instead of check-time to determine dependencies and stale packages. (Should
35 make depclean work)
36 4) Support partial overlap of same-version/same-package packages. This would
37 require some extra variable like EXTRASLOT (for example php would specify
38 a value like apache2 for the apache2 module and apache1 for the apache1
39 module). This variable can be determined at the compilation time based on
40 other parameters. The package database needs some name mangling (shouldn't
41 be a big problem). Further there needs to be some overlap detection. What
42 this would mean is that at the moment a second package of the same version
43 but with a different EXTRASLOT would be merged, the overlapping filenames
44 would be collected. Those would go in a general package. The ones from the
45 original package that do not overlap go to a new package specific to that
46 EXTRASLOT, and the files that are new go into the package with the new
47 EXTRASLOT.
48
49 Why is this important. It allows for a package like php to be compiled as
50 both a plugin to apache1 as to apache2 without any difficulties. It is also
51 the solution for modules like alsa and nvidia drivers, and it eases
52 cross-compiler installation.
53 5) Make the ebuild format as extendable as possible (without breaking all
54 current ones) to allow for future enhancements.
55 6) (sidestep) Make a clear system for specifying the locales that should be
56 built, and if a specific locale needs to be chosen, what is the priority
57 list for that. This will make locales in things like kde and openoffice a
58 lot easier, but it also should be used by glibc and other ebuilds.
59
60 Paul
61
62 --
63 Paul de Vrieze
64 Researcher
65 Mail: pauldv@××××××.nl
66 Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] portage-ng requirements doc Andrew Gaffney <agaffney@×××××××××××××××××××.net>
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] portage-ng requirements doc Daniel Robbins <drobbins@g.o>