Gentoo Archives: gentoo-qa

From: Stephen Bennett <spb@g.o>
To: gentoo-qa@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-qa] Support of other package managers
Date: Tue, 16 May 2006 20:48:04
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-qa] Support of other package managers by Seemant Kulleen
Seemant Kulleen wrote:
> So I think the question that > we need to answer is *what* changes are necessary to the profiles and > *why* -- or I suppose, why would paludis/pkgcore need to have its own > profile?
The profile currently being proposed would change the default virtual/portage provider, and ensure that paludis gets pulled in instead of Portage in the system set. It would also serve as a proving ground, if you will, for some profile features that Paludis supports and Portage does not -- for example, profile level USE forcing (for example, the ip28 USE flag in relevant Mips profiles), USE combination restrictions (see the PHP ebuilds for where this could be useful), and potentially multiple profile inheritance. According to my understanding of Portage's profile handling, these will all be silently ignored by Portage, so nothing will break. Paludis' profile handling is, as far as I know, fully backwards compatible; the new profile is purely for the change in the system set and to provide a place where people can use the new features without stepping on anyone else's toes. -- gentoo-qa@g.o mailing list