From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 15231 invoked by uid 1002); 17 Mar 2003 16:12:45 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 876 invoked from network); 17 Mar 2003 16:12:45 -0000 From: Robert Cole Reply-To: robert.cole@support4linux.com Organization: Questnet Linux Training & Services To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2003 08:12:43 -0800 User-Agent: KMail/1.5 References: <200303161022.26831.wigren@home.se> <3E74D537.7020606@yahoo.com.br> <1047844849.7420.22.camel@blackhole> In-Reply-To: <1047844849.7420.22.camel@blackhole> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200303170812.43392.robert.cole@support4linux.com> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] ACCEPT_KEYWORDS + bootstrap.sh X-Archives-Salt: ddb59209-837f-47d1-86f7-8eaa07e2e800 X-Archives-Hash: ae59bee703603cca172abfee91b87edd I kind of agree with both points here. :) Let me explain... If the RCx releases would use updated packages that are in the stable tree (ie. glibc 2.3.1, gcc 3.2.2, etc) I think people like Per, Nicholas, and myself would be a bit happier building and testing older systems. :) If they are in the stable tree why not? Could this be done in the rc4 release? Another keyword like BUILD_ACCEPT_KEYWORDS = x86 would probably satisfy those with the urge to be super on edge :) and could probably be done with min. effort in changes to the scripts to look for another keyword. Yes? No? maybe? Should I add it to the "bug" report? Robert On Sunday 16 March 2003 12:00 pm, Nicholas Hockey wrote: > if your by a river in florida chances yer in a swamp, or near a sink > hole, not a good place to lay the foundation of your house > > On Sun, 2003-03-16 at 14:49, Felipe Ghellar wrote: > > Nicholas Hockey wrote: > > > well there is a reason that the base system is set up a certain way, > > > it's so that when you do run the bootstrap it will compile, in Linux > > > there is no real "base system" as there is in freebsd, so the only > > > logical way around this is to build a good foundation, which is well > > > known to build a complete system, at the sacrifice of time. > > > > Ok, let's simulate the installation process... > > > > 1) I preapare everything according to the Install Guide > > 2) I set up my make.conf the way I want it, with ~x86 > > 3) I run bootstrap.sh; it ignores my "unstable" choice and builds a > > "stable" base system > > 4) I run emerge system and then complete the installation > > 5) later, I run emerge --sync and emerge -u --deep system; it now > > follows my "unstable" choice and brings in all those packages > > bootstrap.sh ignored > > > > The net result is just that "sacrifice of time" you mentioned... > > > > > or they could do it your way, by the way i have some cheap land in > > > Florida, right next to the river, i'll sell it to you, by your > > > standards it should be a great place to build a house > > > > > > (sorry if this sounds rude i just thought this would be a good > > > comparison) > > > > Sorry, I don't get your point... (and I did't take it as rude) > > > > Felipe Ghellar -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list