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 1Nanl3-00020a-3f for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 10:07:22 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B1818E09FA for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 10:07:20 +0000 (UTC) Received: from filifionka.chopin.edu.pl (mx.chopin.edu.pl [195.187.82.250]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8B6A5E0850 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 09:28:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by filifionka.chopin.edu.pl (Postfix) with ESMTP id B798953D9F for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 10:29:20 +0100 (CET) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at chopin.edu.pl Received: from filifionka.chopin.edu.pl ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (filifionka.chopin.edu.pl [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id 4K4NwCs1NSnx for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 10:29:19 +0100 (CET) Received: from lemongrass (chello087206024243.chello.pl [87.206.24.243]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-CAMELLIA256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by filifionka.chopin.edu.pl (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 0ACF053AB5 for ; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 10:29:19 +0100 (CET) Received: by lemongrass (Postfix, from userid 1000) id C38EC24CAB; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 10:28:16 +0100 (CET) Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 10:28:16 +0100 From: Antoni Grzymala To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Building custom package for multi-arch/system Message-ID: <20100129092816.GA21144@chopin.edu.pl> References: <20100128151741.GC4462@lady-voodoo.exosec.local> <20100129052415.GA6088@bbone> 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=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20100129052415.GA6088@bbone> X-Hungarian-Salami: Pick 100 User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.20 (2009-06-14) X-Archives-Salt: 14254a90-38ac-4d59-b7a0-2e164a2fcf84 X-Archives-Hash: bece36d01c20687c7a7c9b33c57a050b Max Arnold dixit (2010-01-29, 12:24): > On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 04:17:41PM +0100, Beber wrote: > > So, do you guys plan to implement a such thing ? That's one of the > > features that is mostly missing imho. The principal miss in on > > client side as I have tools to manage packages but would like to not > > have too much specific scripts on client side. > > I like the way it done in OpenEmbedded. You have the tree of recipes > (think of portage tree) and bunch of targets. For each target BitBake > can generate binary release and package feed. Client package > management is lightweight and does not require BitBake, recipes tree > and even python. At least this is my lame interpretation of how it > works :) > > Maybe this "metadistribution" approach is cleaner than binary package > support in emerge. If user wants to compile packages on the client, he > uses portage. If not - he can setup build server for multiple targets > and completely drop portage from client machines. The only thing > client should know is feed url with full list of binary packages. And > I do not think client should deal with USE flags - for large > installations unification is the only sane way to scale. I think something similar is very nicely done on R-Path based distributions (with "flavours" [1]). Conary itself also seems to be a pretty well thought out package manager. [1] http://docs.rpath.com/conary/Conaryopedia/sect-flavors.html -- [a]