From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D6E81392EF for ; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 13:30:57 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DCA6EE0908; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 13:30:51 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-vc0-f177.google.com (mail-vc0-f177.google.com [209.85.220.177]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EEB84E0900 for ; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 13:30:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-vc0-f177.google.com with SMTP id ij19so10176705vcb.8 for ; Wed, 02 Jul 2014 06:30:50 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=PuPi/9UOkOif2uRlGbYSKMLg5vsdv2RzvtQsQG7CXko=; b=JYMW7BTLA4pmkZsopqeZNaSzcpqNIZNCAS72DmHQor2SHnl1ofmzSXOell6yo5fjQX HxvowRCQoEtuskQVjmvpQWA85M3XCnDb2ll36/L8Q60gNFt+jAzrhh1v+OzantB473SE T8CilVtjRTSX3I7ZsY1u9K2JfOC3Bn8Y3s2qQBXmC9qr9QK824E/M8EbIBQPbXsd6v9d 90InK5n4nVv7ba1IqqnBGvHdFheLVZ0Axx+paKVvLNbYJ/7TnEhFubr/moyd2EcB9RUU rpGwhOIM+KKXUfvnwi6uyIH+GFzs+nbKwp7wIhIWobG4XOinDWrVAdOpf5Q39Zqvad/Y 1Daw== 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 X-Received: by 10.58.234.199 with SMTP id ug7mr339913vec.40.1404307850090; Wed, 02 Jul 2014 06:30:50 -0700 (PDT) Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.52.72.19 with HTTP; Wed, 2 Jul 2014 06:30:50 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <7201525.QuAkliyKH2@kailua> References: <53AB007C.5070306@gentoo.org> <20140625204457.6d6ed82b@pomiot.lan> <7201525.QuAkliyKH2@kailua> Date: Wed, 2 Jul 2014 09:30:50 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: WVOYmA08TJDQjjgOzWjazvxdjfo Message-ID: Subject: Re: Re: [gentoo-dev] Making a common sub-profile for no-multilib From: Rich Freeman To: gentoo-dev Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: a2059f7e-ec83-40c1-bb46-fbef0459ba3a X-Archives-Hash: 16663a9be0996be2c4dd18c9e44e6af7 On Wed, Jun 25, 2014 at 4:01 PM, Andreas K. Huettel 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 wrote: >> > Long story short, doing anything to Gentoo profiles is utter pain >> > and comes with random breakage guarantee. Therefore, I'm asking -- nuk= e >> > 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 So, not wanting this to die on the vine. If we did the mix-in approach, would we just follow the example of Funtoo? 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). Do we want to do things the same way? 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... Rich