On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 21:39:49 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| So bluntly, shut up and let those who you think are being retarded,
| be retarded. Discussions on this list regarding those attempts
| shouldn't be heckled unless you're contributing to those efforts (and
| I truly mean
On Thursday 06 October 2005 20:51, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 21:39:49 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| So bluntly, shut up and let those who you think are being retarded,
| be retarded. Discussions on this list regarding those attempts
| shouldn't be heckled
Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 21:39:49 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| So bluntly, shut up and let those who you think are being retarded,
| be retarded. Discussions on this list regarding those attempts
| shouldn't be heckled unless you're contributing to those
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 07:29:12PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Thu, 06 Oct 2005 09:07:12 -0400 Alec Warner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| Then I suggest you file this e-mail away and when the time comes that
| the code is to be merged and it sucks ( and by sucks I mean more than
| it
On Thu, 6 Oct 2005 13:42:55 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| What's stated above, and what this thread has come down to is that
| you're putting a lot of reqs and pointing at whatever roadblock you
| can for anyone who attempts it. Kudos, although bluntly, talk is
| cheap.
Bah.
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 11:35:18 -0700 m h [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| I'm working on trying to get prefixed installs working.
You might want to start with a proper (not content-free like the last
two attempts) requirements spec and design before you jump in with the
code.
--
Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo
m h wrote:
Hey Folks-
I'm working on trying to get prefixed installs working. (As such, I'm
using some code kindly modified by Michael Haubenwallner. ) I'm now
in python code (portage) and would like to compare what I have with
gentoo proper.
Is this the location of the latest up to date
Sorry, on further reading of my post, my questions weren't clear. My
first question is where is the current head of portage in CVS? (I'd
like to compare with what I have, and I'm not sure if I'm looking in
the right place).
WRT implementing Prefix. I'm looking at Michael's code, because I
want
Yay, time for another flame war (just what I'd love to spend my time
on).
On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 04:06:47PM -0400, Alec Joseph Warner wrote:
Hey Folks-
I'm working on trying to get prefixed installs working. (As such, I'm
using some code kindly modified by Michael Haubenwallner. ) I'm
m h wrote:
Sorry, on further reading of my post, my questions weren't clear. My
first question is where is the current head of portage in CVS? (I'd
like to compare with what I have, and I'm not sure if I'm looking in
the right place).
WRT implementing Prefix. I'm looking at Michael's code,
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 15:24:29 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| To head off the it's not going to work for vim-*, yah, you'll be
| boned and have to install duplicate vim-* into the global prefix.
| Bluntly, either you dive in and start wading through the problems
| (fixing them as
On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 09:57:03PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 15:24:29 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| To head off the it's not going to work for vim-*, yah, you'll be
| boned and have to install duplicate vim-* into the global prefix.
| Bluntly, either
On Oct 5, 2005, at 3:57 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 15:24:29 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| To head off the it's not going to work for vim-*, yah, you'll be
| boned and have to install duplicate vim-* into the global prefix.
| Bluntly, either you dive in and
On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 04:16:06PM -0500, Kito wrote:
My first question would be how to identify ebuilds that respect $
{prefix}?
A separate profile/keyword seems wrong.
Agreed.
ICANINSTALLTO was the best idea presented, but that implies it would
be a list of known working prefixes,
On 10/5/05, Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 01:48:03PM -0700, m h wrote:
On 10/5/05, Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yay, time for another flame war (just what I'd love to spend my time
on).
Sorry, I'm really not trying to kindle any flames here.
On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 02:52:59PM -0700, m h wrote:
Hmmm, I'm not clear yet on the value of interdomain, but I'm sure
someone will enlighten me along the way...
interdomain would be how ciaran's HOME request would be pulled off;
user's 'domain', configuration settings + prefix offset would try
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 16:16:06 -0500 Kito [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| b) assume that you'll not have to modify ebuilds
|
| I don't think anyone(devs) has made this naive assumption have they?
pvdabeel has for pathspec.
| and c)
| demand that as soon as it's available, it works for all ebuilds.
|
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 16:13:06 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| A) would like to hear what you think is required planning wise
| compared to the previous haubi prototype patch.
There has been no serious discussion on how *ebuilds* will use the
prefix system. Hacking econf and
On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 11:29:56PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 16:16:06 -0500 Kito [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| b) assume that you'll not have to modify ebuilds
|
| I don't think anyone(devs) has made this naive assumption have they?
pvdabeel has for pathspec.
| and
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 18:00:12 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| Beyond that, there is the shebang issue which can be addresses via a
| combination of automated scans/fixes, and fixing bugs as it's hit.
| Hardcoded vars in scripts for the path to a binary are an issue also,
|
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 12:14:30AM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 18:00:12 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| Beyond that, there is the shebang issue which can be addresses via a
| combination of automated scans/fixes, and fixing bugs as it's hit.
| Hardcoded
Brian Harring wrote:
On Wed, Oct 05, 2005 at 11:31:32PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 16:13:06 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| A) would like to hear what you think is required planning wise
| compared to the previous haubi prototype patch.
There has been
Thanks for the warning Alec. Since I already have very limited
knowledge of the internals, I figure this will be a good trial by fire
(learn sort of the portage internals and issues with prefixed
installs). If it works, perhaps I will be able to devote more time to
it and do more than a simple
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 12:38:35AM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 18:22:37 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 12:14:30AM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
| On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 18:00:12 -0500 Brian Harring
| [EMAIL PROTECTED]
| wrote:
| |
m h wrote:
Thanks for the warning Alec. Since I already have very limited
knowledge of the internals, I figure this will be a good trial by fire
(learn sort of the portage internals and issues with prefixed
installs). If it works, perhaps I will be able to devote more time to
it and do more
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 18:40:46 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| It does in some places, it doesn't in others. It especially doesn't
| for things that aren't normally found via PATH. It's a hell of a
| mess.
|
| Examples?
Of stuff in PATH? /bin/sh is assumed throughout to be a Bourne
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 01:13:53AM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 18:40:46 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| It does in some places, it doesn't in others. It especially doesn't
| for things that aren't normally found via PATH. It's a hell of a
| mess.
|
|
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 20:01:34 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| What's being raised here is issues with making ebuilds handle prefix
| _perfectly_. Where are the portage issues, so that people can
| actually jump in and start testing out actual solutions, rather then
| conjecturing
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 20:17:40 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| The issue is that you need to fix autoconf before you can claim that
| any non-trivial test case works correctly.
|
| And how are you going to verify autoconf works perfectly without
| testing it?
Can't. Dead easy to
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 02:23:47AM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 20:17:40 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| The issue is that you need to fix autoconf before you can claim that
| any non-trivial test case works correctly.
|
| And how are you going to verify
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 20:32:20 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| That's rather short-sighted... Portage is irrelevant without the
| ebuilds.
|
| And ebuilds are irrelevant without portage. Point?
Portage is considerably less work than the tree. Saving as much effort
as possible from
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 02:40:58AM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 20:32:20 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Portage is considerably less work than the tree. Saving as much effort
as possible from an ebuild perspective should be a major consideration,
even if it makes
On Oct 5, 2005, at 7:13 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 18:40:46 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| It does in some places, it doesn't in others. It especially
doesn't
| for things that aren't normally found via PATH. It's a hell of a
| mess.
|
| Examples?
Of
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 20:48:26 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| The sensible place to start experimenting is by adapting existing
| ebuilds and tinkering with ebuild.sh, not by adding something which
| may or may not end up being relevant to portage proper.
|
| Bluntly, what the
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 20:56:42 -0500 Kito [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Its not like this is unchartered territory... off the top o'
| me head pkgsrc, DarwinPorts, openpkg, fink, written word,
| autopackage, MINE, and SamHain have all tackled this in one way or
| the other. All of these projects
On Oct 5, 2005, at 9:02 PM, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 20:56:42 -0500 Kito [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| Its not like this is unchartered territory... off the top o'
| me head pkgsrc, DarwinPorts, openpkg, fink, written word,
| autopackage, MINE, and SamHain have all tackled
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 03:01:12AM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005 20:48:26 -0500 Brian Harring [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
| The sensible place to start experimenting is by adapting existing
| ebuilds and tinkering with ebuild.sh, not by adding something which
| may or may
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005, Kito wrote:
[snip]
My first question would be how to identify ebuilds that respect ${prefix}?
A separate profile/keyword seems wrong.
ICANINSTALLTO was the best idea presented, but that implies it would be
a list of known working prefixes, which seems unrealistic.
On Thu, Oct 06, 2005 at 02:14:32PM +1000, Finn Thain wrote:
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005, Kito wrote:
[snip]
My first question would be how to identify ebuilds that respect ${prefix}?
A separate profile/keyword seems wrong.
ICANINSTALLTO was the best idea presented, but that implies
39 matches
Mail list logo
