On 07/02/14 14:41, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 07/02/2014 02:10 PM, Rich Freeman wrote:
On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 1:54 PM, Michał Górny <mgo...@gentoo.org> wrote:
I don't feel like we ought to vote on something like this without
understanding most of the current profiles. And I'm afraid there are
only few people who have any idea about the current profile
structure...
No argument there.
We may very well still end up with something hierarchical, but we can
at least limit that to the parts of the profile where it matters.
Maybe x86/BSD and amd64/Linux and amd64/Linux-hardened need to be
interdependent. However, that still gets rid of need to deal with
desktop environments, init systems, arguments over what belongs in
@system, and so on. We could have a blocker mechanism to keep people
from mixing systemd with BSD, or we could just let people shoot
themselves in the foot.
Sounds like a good time to start reverse engineering the profiles...
I've talked to the funtoo devs a few times about stealing their profile
idea. A few things need to be done to make this happen, mainly eselect,
catalyst, and repoman support. I can do the eselect and catalyst
changes myself, however, I'll require some help for the repoman support
most likely. I'll prototype this locally, see what I can make work, and
then see about making it usable for others to test.
- -Zero
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
I don't know how to get from here to there. The problem isn't just
constructing an alternative profile tree. We could even have
/usr/portage/profiles-r2 and switch between the two on demand. The
problem is there's a lot of memory with flags and masks and these only
make sense in the context of the current stacking profiles.
Disentangling this information and bringing it over to profiles-r2 is
going to be work.
--
Anthony G. Basile, Ph.D.
Gentoo Linux Developer [Hardened]
E-Mail : bluen...@gentoo.org
GnuPG FP : 1FED FAD9 D82C 52A5 3BAB DC79 9384 FA6E F52D 4BBA
GnuPG ID : F52D4BBA
