On 16/10/16 06:30 PM, William L. Thomson Jr. wrote: > On Saturday, October 15, 2016 4:10:51 PM EDT Kent Fredric wrote: >> >> Yeah, I get the intent, but I don't see it being likely we'd ever have >> a real usecase for having both a -bin and a -gbin in tree together. > > You actually came up with one I was not considering at first but provides a > direct technical benefit you cannot achieve with a USE flag. > >> If anything, I'd imagine if that case arose, it would manifest itself more >> as: >> >> icedtea-bin + USE=official > > Then how would you test that against non official? You cannot install the > same > package twice at the same time with different USE flags. You can't even make > binaries easily of the same package with different USE flags. The previous > binary will get overwritten.
*IF* we were going to make use of upstream vs gentoo-generated binary packages in the tree, they *WOULD* block one-another as they would collide file-wise at least partially if not completely. So there wouldn't be any testing between the two variants on the same installed system. > Maybe the upstream binary runs better, does not crash, etc. Or the Gentoo one > does. If the Gentoo one is better, it could be used to get a reluctant > upstream to make changes. If worse could be used to help figure out where its > going wrong. OK, so here's how things *actually work* in the gentoo repo: #1, binary packages aren't made unless there's a really good reason for them -- the primary one being that there isn't any other option provided by upstream. #2, if there is a binary package then the only reason why a gentoo dev would roll it instead of using upstream's version is because the upstream one fails hard or has too many bugs, security vulnerabilities, whatever. This is as much done on a per-version basis within a package as it is on a per-package one. All of this discussion is centered around trying to bring convention to a problem that simply doesn't exist. Also, if the idea here is to open the door for a flood of gentoo-dev-rolled *-bin packages in the gentoo repo for end-user convenience, then we should similarly stop this discussion right now too. How about, instead, you could focus on setting up two (additional) repos -- one containing gentoo-built binary packages, another containing upstream-only packages. That way it'll be very obvious to end-users what they'll be using because they'll know exactly based on where it comes from. It'll also be very easy for end-users to control which one is used, just by choosing which repo it comes from. AND, it'll keep them from polluting the main gentoo repo too.
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
