Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC - Gentoo on the Lab

2005-08-23 Thread Kristian Benoit
On Mon, 2005-08-22 at 15:39 -0500, Brian Harring wrote: That and help would always be welcome :P Then where do I find the code (I'm an official dev yet, so I only have access to what's in the mirrors and the patchs on mailing lists) -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC - Gentoo on the Lab

2005-08-23 Thread Ricardo Loureiro
On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 21:41:35 +0100 Stephen Bennett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: portage-ng is dead. There is a rewrite going on, but it'll take a while to get anywhere near usable. I searched a bit to find information about portage-ng but the only doc I found was Daniel's pdf with just a drawing

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC - Gentoo on the Lab

2005-08-23 Thread Brian Harring
On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 12:25:03PM -0400, Kristian Benoit wrote: On Mon, 2005-08-22 at 15:39 -0500, Brian Harring wrote: That and help would always be welcome :P Then where do I find the code (I'm an official dev yet, so I only have access to what's in the mirrors and the patchs on mailing

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC - Gentoo on the Lab

2005-08-23 Thread Brian Harring
On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 12:25:03PM -0400, Kristian Benoit wrote: On Mon, 2005-08-22 at 15:39 -0500, Brian Harring wrote: That and help would always be welcome :P Then where do I find the code (I'm an official dev yet, so I only have access to what's in the mirrors and the patchs on mailing

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC - Gentoo on the Lab

2005-08-23 Thread Marius Mauch
On 08/23/05 Ricardo Loureiro wrote: On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 21:41:35 +0100 Stephen Bennett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: portage-ng is dead. There is a rewrite going on, but it'll take a while to get anywhere near usable. I searched a bit to find information about portage-ng but the only

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC - Gentoo on the Lab

2005-08-23 Thread Brian Harring
Lot of text left inline, pardon, just scroll and deal with it :P On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 12:28:08PM -0400, Kristian Benoit wrote: Here is my recent communication with Pieter: On Sat, 2005-08-13 at 21:59 +0200, Pieter Van den Abeele wrote: On 13 Aug 2005, at 19:16, Kristian Benoit wrote:

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC - Gentoo on the Lab

2005-08-23 Thread Ricardo Loureiro
On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 15:39:10 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The 2.1 code that was pushed out for inspection addresses the cache issue mostly, and modularization as much as possible. Everything else falls to the rewrite which is underway- I'd suggest contacting portage

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC - Gentoo on the Lab

2005-08-23 Thread Kristian Benoit
On Tue, 2005-08-23 at 12:27 -0500, Brian Harring wrote: On Tue, Aug 23, 2005 at 12:25:03PM -0400, Kristian Benoit wrote: On Mon, 2005-08-22 at 15:39 -0500, Brian Harring wrote: That and help would always be welcome :P Then where do I find the code (I'm an official dev yet, so I only

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC - Gentoo on the Lab

2005-08-22 Thread Ivan Yosifov
On Sun, 2005-08-21 at 20:34 -0700, Donnie Berkholz wrote: | The final result of the project will be released to the community | (GPL or BSD, still need to think), so I'd love to ear from users | dealing with this kind of scenario, question, comments, whatever you | think I should focus on. Oh,

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC - Gentoo on the Lab

2005-08-22 Thread Marius Mauch
On 08/22/05 Ricardo Loureiro wrote: 1- Can I RSYNC_EXCLUDE everything except profiles and have an usable system? Define usable. As only portage uses the tree it would be the only thing that might break. 2- There was a portagesql effort, is it dead? As far as I know, yes. But it wasn't what

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC - Gentoo on the Lab

2005-08-22 Thread Ricardo Loureiro
On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 16:38:11 +0200 Marius Mauch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Define usable. As only portage uses the tree it would be the only thing that might break. Usable in the way that the client machines should be able to use portage, except it's the hacked (or new package) version that

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC - Gentoo on the Lab

2005-08-22 Thread Grobian
Ricardo Loureiro wrote: Usable in the way that the client machines should be able to use portage, except it's the hacked (or new package) version that should do everything from the SQL server. For example, a emerge package would behave in 2 possible ways;1- calculate it's dependencies from the

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC - Gentoo on the Lab

2005-08-22 Thread Kristian Benoit
On Mon, 2005-08-22 at 16:38 +0200, Marius Mauch wrote: Anyway, I hope you realize that your project doesn't only involve hacking on portage, but rewriting almost all of it for the client part. Actually I'd rather suggest you start from scratch I do agree with that, portage probably need a

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC - Gentoo on the Lab

2005-08-22 Thread Stephen Bennett
On Mon, 22 Aug 2005 13:49:14 -0400 Kristian Benoit [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I do agree with that, portage probably need a rewrite/better modularization anyway. There is/was a project called portage-ng () you might want to have a look at. I did a little in that direction recently, and it seems

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC - Gentoo on the Lab

2005-08-22 Thread Brian Harring
On Mon, Aug 22, 2005 at 01:49:14PM -0400, Kristian Benoit wrote: On Mon, 2005-08-22 at 16:38 +0200, Marius Mauch wrote: Anyway, I hope you realize that your project doesn't only involve hacking on portage, but rewriting almost all of it for the client part. Actually I'd rather suggest you

Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC - Gentoo on the Lab

2005-08-21 Thread Donnie Berkholz
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Ricardo Loureiro wrote: | As part of the final project for my graduation in Informatics | Engineering (kinda Computer Science but that's the official name), | I'm gonna develop a distributed portage so we can have a test | lab at our uni with Gentoo