Re: [gentoo-dev] splitting one source package into many binaries

2005-06-17 Thread Brian Jackson
Thomas de Grenier de Latour wrote: On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 13:50:47 -0300 Rafael Espíndola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Has someone worked on changing ebuild so that it could create many binary packages from one source? And that's it. Sorry for the long email, writing it made me think of a

Re: [gentoo-dev] splitting one source package into many binaries

2005-06-17 Thread Thomas de Grenier de Latour
On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 13:50:47 -0300 Rafael Espíndola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Has someone worked on changing ebuild so that it could create > many binary packages from one source? A less intrusive solution (well, i think, although it would still be an important change) would be to have some k

Re: [gentoo-dev] splitting one source package into many binaries

2005-06-16 Thread Rafael =?utf-8?q?=C3=81vila_de_Esp=C3=ADndola?=
Em Thu 16 Jun 2005 14:05, Patrick Lauer escreveu: > It depends on your point of view. > Having to install 142 -devel packages just to be able to compile $foo is > quite frustrating - I prefer the Gentoo way. I agree. I think that by default emerge should install everything from . My idea is to te

Re: [gentoo-dev] splitting one source package into many binaries

2005-06-16 Thread Rafael =?iso-8859-1?q?=C1vila_de_Esp=EDndola?=
Em Thu 16 Jun 2005 14:01, Caleb Tennis escreveu: > On Thursday 16 June 2005 11:50 am, Rafael Espíndola wrote: > > Is this a bad idea or simply not the Gentoo way? > > The idea isn't bad, but the implementation is more work to maintain than > it's probably worth. > > You can, of course, always roll

Re: [gentoo-dev] splitting one source package into many binaries

2005-06-16 Thread Yuri Vasilevski
Hi, On Thu, 16 Jun 2005 12:40:39 -0500 Brian Jackson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Rafael Espíndola wrote: > > I am using Gentoo to build some small systems. While things like the > > minimal useflag is a joy, the monolithic nature of most gentoo > > packages is a headache. > > > > Kde has been s

Re: [gentoo-dev] splitting one source package into many binaries

2005-06-16 Thread Brian Jackson
Rafael Espíndola wrote: I am using Gentoo to build some small systems. While things like the minimal useflag is a joy, the monolithic nature of most gentoo packages is a headache. Kde has been spit and libstdc++ can be installed without gcc but there are many other packages that don't have this

Re: [gentoo-dev] splitting one source package into many binaries

2005-06-16 Thread Mike Frysinger
On Thursday 16 June 2005 12:50 pm, Rafael Espíndola wrote: > libstdc++ can be installed without gcc that's a bad example, we're debating what to do with the package seeing as how many never wanted it in the first place -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list

Re: [gentoo-dev] splitting one source package into many binaries

2005-06-16 Thread Patrick Lauer
On Thu, 2005-06-16 at 13:50 -0300, Rafael Espíndola wrote: > I am using Gentoo to build some small systems. While things like the > minimal useflag is a joy, the monolithic nature of most gentoo > packages is a headache. It depends on your point of view. Having to install 142 -devel packages just t

Re: [gentoo-dev] splitting one source package into many binaries

2005-06-16 Thread Caleb Tennis
On Thursday 16 June 2005 11:50 am, Rafael Espíndola wrote: > Is this a bad idea or simply not the Gentoo way? The idea isn't bad, but the implementation is more work to maintain than it's probably worth. You can, of course, always roll your own ebuild variation and keep it in your portage overl

[gentoo-dev] splitting one source package into many binaries

2005-06-16 Thread =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Rafael_Esp=EDndola?=
I am using Gentoo to build some small systems. While things like the minimal useflag is a joy, the monolithic nature of most gentoo packages is a headache. Kde has been spit and libstdc++ can be installed without gcc but there are many other packages that don't have this feature. For example, inst