| 1 |
25.09.13 04:24, Benda Xu написав(ла): |
| 2 |
> Dear Jauhien, |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> Just a crazy idea. Can we have backends of Debian (dpkg/apt), Fedora |
| 5 |
> (yum/rpm), Archlinux (pacman) and FreeBSD (ports)? |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> How much work is needed? If so, you know the consequence! I am too |
| 8 |
> excited to say anything.. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Cheers, |
| 11 |
> Benda |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Hi Benda, |
| 14 |
generally there are two problems with integrating other distros package |
| 15 |
repos: |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
-- problem with dependency names and different packaging strategy (one |
| 18 |
package in Gentoo can correspond to tens of packages in other distros) |
| 19 |
-- problem with binary dependencies (e.g. your package depends on the |
| 20 |
particular version of a so-lib) |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
To address those problems is theoretically possible, but it means de |
| 23 |
facto manually integrate and maintain those package trees. I do not |
| 24 |
think it's a good idea as if you need Debian, you can use Debian. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
The purpose of my project was to integrate upstream not distribution |
| 27 |
specific repositories. It makes sense, as usually there is lots of |
| 28 |
packages there depending only on few packages available in Gentoo, so |
| 29 |
those deps can be maintained manually for the whole overlay. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
So if you know any not distribution specific package repository you |
| 32 |
need, just say me, I'll add a support for it. ) But as I've said |
| 33 |
integration of other distros' repos looks for me as a bad idea. It's |
| 34 |
better to spend the available time on adding new ebuilds for packages |
| 35 |
lacking in Gentoo then on trying to maintain a dependency hell of other |
| 36 |
distros (and it would be a hell, I guarantee you ) ). |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
Regards, |
| 39 |
Jauhien |
Archives