Hi Georg > Hi Francois, > > > Well thanks for the plug for our work. We are quite happy to develop the > > prefix > : > :-) > : > > part of sage-on-gentoo, so far the effort has been limited but if you are > > testing it on an arch we are quite happy to try to get as much as > > possible keyworded. > > Is the keywording the most prominent issue, or getting dozens of > ebuilds "$EPREFIX"-ified? (Or is this the same? My understanding of > Gentoo internals and the Gentoo ecosystem is still rather limited.) >
The two things goes together it has to be $EPREFIX-ified first. Once it is done it is of course another matter to a particular arch keyworded. Keywording makes things easier but is not an obstacle for a seasoned user (I use plenty of ebuilds that are not keyworded ppc to install sage-on-gentoo on a ppc machine. I could probably spend an hour or two filling keyword requests for ppc). > > By the way did you try sage-4.5.3 or 4.6 (alphaX/rc0)? > > I don't think it really mattered, but I targeted sage-4.5.3 (while > some 4.6 alpha had been the youngest ebuild then). > > > Indeed gentoo do not offer you the possibility to have "relocatable" > > binaries as such. It's not the point in a way. However gentoo can create > > binary packages (on an individual package basis) so it would be possible > > to install binaries from a base gentoo prefix install. > > As far as I understand, (re-)installing such a binary package would > only be possible in exactly the same $EPREFIX path, where the binary > package was originally installed in (although possibly on another > computer, of course). That is too tight a restriction in many use > cases (e.g. if you're not the administrator and want/need to install > Sage in your home directory). > Yes it would be better if it was more flexible. I think it is technically doable but it is not easy. > > Francois > > How to continue? E.g. what would you propose, as how I should "make > known" the two gcc-apple patches I mentioned (nobody else seems to use > Gentoo Prefix on Mac OS X 10.4 Tiger, so who possibly would/could > review say a patch on Gentoo Bugzilla)? > Not sure. It may very well be that no one "wants"/"has time" to support 10.4. The only thing to do is really to fill a bug, it will be assigned to the prefix people. I guess we could pick the patch ourselve in sage-on-prefix (see below). > Another point is that both Gentoo Prefix, as well as the sage-on- > gentoo overlay, use patched versions of Python. Maybe it's possible to > join these? > You should be aware that Christopher made a second overlay called sage-on-prefix to address issues which are specifically related to prefix: http://github.com/cschwan/sage-on-prefix Right now the focus has been x86-linux and amd64-linux because it is "easy" to self host them on a regular Gentoo install. Christopher also has a windows machine and is looking at using sage-on-gentoo for windows as well. We should definitely host a "merged" python ebuild on the sage-on-prefix overlay. It is not however a big deal at the moment. The only reason we have our own python in the overlay is pickling: http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=301691 http://bugs.python.org/issue7689 Hopefully there will be some move to merge this upstream. Cheers, Francois -- To post to this group, send an email to sage-devel@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to sage-devel+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-devel URL: http://www.sagemath.org
