From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <gentoo-dev+bounces-66453-garchives=archives.gentoo.org@lists.gentoo.org>
Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80])
by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E242B13877A
for <garchives@archives.gentoo.org>; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 15:44:25 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6FAD3E0946;
Wed, 2 Jul 2014 15:44:20 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from mail-oa0-f54.google.com (mail-oa0-f54.google.com [209.85.219.54])
(using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
(No client certificate requested)
by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 98AAAE091F
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 15:44:19 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-oa0-f54.google.com with SMTP id eb12so12624623oac.27
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>; Wed, 02 Jul 2014 08:44:18 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
h=sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to
:mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:user-agent;
bh=kLtT996QP2oFLrKF3mCkQLPkXXaHoOdyPMjiVupcTUo=;
b=DN66rdZrCcmL9mR2szNAXQBI/08DI+pUneBSDHV+d+iVmx3bxAhbxDoj3wa2R8e1jX
0ZlsIIyMLV1VfMXDUpowLkGM42DQLffJodQf7LzgpxPyhg343kACL7MtIzFMIRPSiEp3
91FI7WIgZeHha4ZRYpDAJE2fuFDSyN3MyaDbVHlcg237zyFmgtHxOCobfrOWvuy4HcL8
UxSvV/3URQCoxoh0YgA66HqXjAHTCHeuvGlsnHn/bKjt3c/FiARhbXX3fhXKK0RFhD7t
PysIsGXnAtvQnxkCgapCsFX6aQww1BXFtI8V0Z4Zu0oxwtcldDaG8pNSSEKKpIrrK/OY
KDnQ==
X-Received: by 10.60.117.39 with SMTP id kb7mr58256907oeb.5.1404315858935;
Wed, 02 Jul 2014 08:44:18 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from linux1 (cpe-76-187-91-128.tx.res.rr.com. [76.187.91.128])
by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id dp8sm49999113obb.14.2014.07.02.08.44.17
for <gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
(version=TLSv1.2 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128);
Wed, 02 Jul 2014 08:44:17 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: William Hubbs <w.d.hubbs@gmail.com>
Received: (nullmailer pid 1290 invoked by uid 1000);
Wed, 02 Jul 2014 15:44:16 -0000
Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2014 10:44:16 -0500
From: William Hubbs <williamh@gentoo.org>
To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Subject: [gentoo-dev] new profile layout with flavors and mix-ins
Message-ID: <20140702154416.GA1151@linux1>
Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Precedence: bulk
List-Post: <mailto:gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Help: <mailto:gentoo-dev+help@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+unsubscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:gentoo-dev+subscribe@lists.gentoo.org>
List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail <gentoo-dev.gentoo.org>
X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1;
protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="pf9I7BMVVzbSWLtt"
Content-Disposition: inline
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.22 (2013-10-16)
X-Archives-Salt: 144a1abc-dccf-421e-b1b7-84c6036f1e5d
X-Archives-Hash: 648543c4cb3f4a3c2558c9e613224062
--pf9I7BMVVzbSWLtt
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
All,
I'm moving to a new thread since the discussion has moved away from just
a sub profile for no-multilib.
On Wed, Jul 02, 2014 at 09:30:50AM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote:
> On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 4:01 PM, Andreas K. Huettel
> <dilfridge@gentoo.org> wrote:
> > Am Mittwoch 25 Juni 2014, 15:11:40 schrieb Rich Freeman:
> >> On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 2:44 PM, Micha=C5=82 G=C3=B3rny <mgorny@gentoo=
=2Eorg> wrote:
> >> > Long story short, doing anything to Gentoo profiles is utter pain
> >> > and comes with random breakage guarantee. Therefore, I'm asking -- n=
uke
> >> > those damn profiles, and start over! The current situation is
> >> > completely unmaintainable.
> >>
> >> ++
> >>
> >> But, would it make sense to just go the Funtoo route with "mix-ins."
> > ++
> >
> > this is what we've been just discussing on the irc channel
>=20
> So, not wanting this to die on the vine.
>=20
> If we did the mix-in approach, would we just follow the example of Funtoo?
>=20
> They use an arch profile, a stability profile (~arch vs arch), a
> "flavor" profile (core, minimal, desktop), and then users can layer as
> much other stuff on top of that as they want (gnome, kde, multimedia,
> etc).
I think this could work for us as well, or something similar anyway.
For those who are curious, I am including the link to the flavors and
mix-ins descriptions from the funtoo site. [1]
>=20
> Do we want to do things the same way?
>=20
> Some things to think about include multilib (just another arch?),
> systemd, and usr-merge. I'm not saying that we need to implement any
> of that stuff completely - but when planning the profile layout we
> should at least consider whether it will handle things like this in
> the future. Should some types of profiles be only additive? Etc...
I see systemd and multilib as mix-ins, like the ones you mentioned
above.
It is funny that you mention usr-merge. I don't want to get into a big
debate on it on this thread, so for now I'll just say that I don't see
that as affecting the profile structure at all.
William
[1] http://www.funtoo.org/Flavors_and_Mix-ins
--pf9I7BMVVzbSWLtt
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc"
Content-Description: Digital signature
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
iEYEARECAAYFAlO0KNAACgkQblQW9DDEZTiECwCcCVmQKlbpH8GPWeeaVxP9hlbC
4BAAn38fZ+rl0cfvwMvoZTUtfGqy2z/O
=Mu8A
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--pf9I7BMVVzbSWLtt--