On Tue, Feb 26, 2013 at 12:38:29AM +0100, Peter Stuge wrote: > W. Trevor King wrote: > > > It's not a bad idea, but OTOH copying /etc/localtime and just > > > removing it again needs no new parameter and would be quite a > > > simple patch. > > > > But then why not just copy over the portage tree too, instead of > > going through the snapshot procedure? > > As it happens, I have a patch which implements that. Hmm, that weakens my argument ;). > > I think the point of catalyst is to isolate the final tarballs/ISOs > > from the host system used to build them. Otherwise we could skip > > stages and catalyst, building the tarballs in a simple chroot. > > Yes and no. For timezone and resolv.conf that doesn't make sense. Agreed for resolv.conf, the presense of which always struck me as odd. It would be nice if resolv.conf only overrode DNS information that was stored in the kernel or something (like /etc/conf.d/hostname). If the builds are not affected by the particular timezone selected, why not just hard-code it to UTC? Folks with their hwclock set to a non-UTC timezone might get an artificial offset, but generated tarballs are more host-agnostic, and an offset of a few hours seems harmless. Not a big deal either way, though ;). -- This email may be signed or encrypted with GnuPG (http://www.gnupg.org). For more information, see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pretty_Good_Privacy