Gentoo Archives: gentoo-portage-dev

From: "vivo75@×××××.com" <vivo75@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o
Cc: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: Is portage (/usr)/bin-merge safe?
Date: Sun, 02 Jun 2013 12:50:38
Message-Id: 51AB3EFA.7000905@gmail.com
In Reply to: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: Is portage (/usr)/bin-merge safe? by Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net>
1 On 06/02/13 13:54, Duncan wrote:
2 > vivo75@×××××.com posted on Sun, 02 Jun 2013 13:14:41 +0200 as excerpted:
3 >
4 >> While portage can be safe, for various reason (including the resultant
5 >> pkg) I do prefer to do the move in post_src_install() #1 All my tests
6 >> have been done against a manually converted filesystem
7 > That's what mine would be...
8 >
9 >> #1 excerpt from bashrc, this code is rough but work in the gentoo
10 >> ebuilds tree domain
11 >>
12 >> move_root_to_usr() {
13 > Thanks. What I was thinking would actually reverse that (/bin being the
14 > real dir, /sbin being a symlink to it), given my (traditional sysadmin)
15 > pref for short paths, but I hadn't thought of a bashrc solution at all,
16 > so that gives me yet another way of doing it. =:^)
17 >
18 > My first thought is that I prefer standard layout packages, however,
19 > easing interoperability should I decide to swap binpkgs with someone.
20 > (Yes, I'm aware of the security issues if the parties don't trust each
21 > other...)
22 >
23 > But OTOH I think that solves issues such as path-based equery belongs,
24 > for instance. Being amd64 for nearing a decade now (and no-multilib for
25 > several years of it), I'm used to worrying about that with the symlinked
26 > lib/lib64 thing, and that's the one thing I wasn't looking forward to
27 > with unified bins. (I think I'll keep bin/sbin separate at first, see
28 > how bin/usr-bin go first, then think about bin/sbin.)
29 >
30 > But if your bashrc solution /does/ solve the equery belongs path thing I
31 > might well use it on lib/lib64 as well... (Either that or since I
32 > believe the libs are a profile thing and I'm already running a heavily
33 > modified profile, no @system for instance, I could probably simply modify
34 > that... Actually, that's probably a better solution in any case, since
35 > it's just undoing mainline settings the same way mainline does them in
36 > the first place.)
37
38 I do generally leave profiles untouched but yes it could be a solution,
39 maybe some research in debian maillist could be beneficial too.
40 In the meantime these commands results should tell you about equery belongs:
41
42 >hom>vivo$ qlist coreutils | grep -c '^/bin/'
43 0
44 >hom>vivo$ qlist coreutils | grep -c '^/usr/bin/'
45 101
46
47 >hom>vivo$ equery belongs /usr/bin/sleep
48 * Searching for /usr/bin/sleep ...
49 sys-apps/coreutils-8.21 (/usr/bin/sleep)

Replies

Subject Author
[gentoo-portage-dev] Re: Is portage (/usr)/bin-merge safe? Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net>