From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Nold7-0002Rs-UF for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 08 Mar 2010 22:40:54 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 30A8DE078C; Mon, 8 Mar 2010 22:40:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CC386E0729 for ; Mon, 8 Mar 2010 22:40:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6CB9C1B4406 for ; Mon, 8 Mar 2010 22:40:34 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -2.853 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.853 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-0.254, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id vLC8-0ZVHvQm for ; Mon, 8 Mar 2010 22:40:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B6CAF1B40C7 for ; Mon, 8 Mar 2010 22:40:27 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NolcX-0002Xz-94 for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Mon, 08 Mar 2010 23:40:17 +0100 Received: from liten.csbnet.se ([95.80.45.98]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 08 Mar 2010 23:40:17 +0100 Received: from xake by liten.csbnet.se with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 08 Mar 2010 23:40:17 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Peter Hjalmarsson Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: Reorganizing handling of target specific profiles (Was: Split desktop profile patches & news item for review) Date: Mon, 08 Mar 2010 23:40:00 +0100 Message-ID: <1268088000.10198.20.camel@lillen> References: <201003041652.56521.tampakrap@gentoo.org> <1268068400.10824.36.camel@localhost> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: liten.csbnet.se In-Reply-To: <1268068400.10824.36.camel@localhost> X-Mailer: Evolution 2.29.91 X-Archives-Salt: f4f6c62a-a248-4741-9fc4-54e527fc2c14 X-Archives-Hash: 7515ff540aed3a8eb37252d90033be27 m=C3=A5n 2010-03-08 klockan 19:13 +0200 skrev Mart Raudsepp: > Instead I think we should be improving "eselect profile" to support > multiple inheriting /etc/make.profile files in a user friendly fashion, > and in the end removing 249 subprofiles, instead of adding 28+. >=20 I vote for this one. A profile being a only contains what is interesting for that profile, and you can "stash together" some profiles into your own cocktail. Yeah, I know it sounds horrible, but it would still be better then to only be able to focus on one small set. For example if I am using the GNOME DE, and have someone other also using my computer, but who really wants to use KDE. Should I have to find out what from the KDE profile to enable in my env to make my GNOME-profile also tingle for KDE? I think having a set of "base profiles" for toolchains and alike (i.e. default, hardened) would be good. Then be able to add for example desktop/gnome or server and/or selinux profiles on top would be interesting. This also for maintainers, as for example PeBenito can focus on the selinux part of the profiles, and do not have to keep up to date with which hardened-compilers are currently masked/unmasked.