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 C3E471381F4 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2012 12:01:14 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id DE2EE21C00A; Thu, 16 Aug 2012 12:00:42 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-bk0-f53.google.com (mail-bk0-f53.google.com [209.85.214.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 785C721C006 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2012 11:59:50 +0000 (UTC) Received: by bkwj4 with SMTP id j4so1137769bkw.40 for ; Thu, 16 Aug 2012 04:59:49 -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 :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=O3/Y7ceGjJWt0sR+TzyPD0pzYNCwfii6gEuRO0/A5ks=; b=a+cUlBPedBPXilzNbD6DG8cVsiR8xE3WDstSJgNGBKWHP9HE2pg3nyEDjjArz2lTWo Q8MqaFCdQ2lMRQv4oDVUCOMl4MSZHf5GePjXXxEbZrbZDeUDBwQlyv6sp2Z+vQvD8BJ0 WgmUH1Gu7S1oFGg0sNqoZ4UZxPaK1GPBHIh/S0WGrRUv3MTbWlcN8EqTTWc1+jqJPizh UgClnVYB9gMX6tLC9tks2CST53AgXy6iYhwi6vdMEdSRLrGY6tPa2F07P/d9AkJBiqsd n1g9L8bq3CvL9tyDaEm77z9qCc+yGGhM/a2qkAv7K4JNLIN5kUo3e7oGEFm6myPLu6TA 1flg== 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 Received: by 10.204.129.8 with SMTP id m8mr334757bks.62.1345118389572; Thu, 16 Aug 2012 04:59:49 -0700 (PDT) Sender: freemanrich@gmail.com Received: by 10.204.14.76 with HTTP; Thu, 16 Aug 2012 04:59:49 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <1344366029.24762.31.camel@TesterTop4> <502377E7.8010803@gentoo.org> <1344535966.2121.6.camel@TesterTop4> <20120809183130.GA6795@linux1> <20120809195727.5d04ccff@googlemail.com> <20120814032416.GA8489@kroah.com> Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2012 07:59:49 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: dCOKOw_rsJiyfTgBfP-1UmAd4c4 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Questions about SystemD and OpenRC From: Rich Freeman To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Archives-Salt: 2019bbce-38a1-4f54-bdbd-e5b56f37513a X-Archives-Hash: 17518aab5c0b74b0fec9df10f8e64d8a On Wed, Aug 15, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Michael Mol wrote: > It also sounds like something like that could be a benefit to shrinking @system. > I think the solution to the circular dependency issue isn't to make Portage able to completely bootstrap the whole system, but rather just to make it capable of coping with the issues and knowing when to raise an alarm. Gentoo will always involve extracting a tarball/etc for the initial installation since you always need SOMETHING to start with. You can't even chroot into your install directory without a shell being there, and typing "emerge" won't go so well if portage isn't actually installed. So, continue to build stages like we do right now - no doubt with hard-coding and such to get around the dependencies. As far as objections to listing gcc and such in every ebuild go, why not? We list all kinds of routine stuff in hundreds of ebuilds so that we can install systems without them. Why not just have a toolchain virtual or something? And since ssh was brought up - this is what happens with hacks like this. When you combine the "default install" with the "minimum deps for everything" list you end up with an ssh you can't get rid of without the package.provided hack (which really should be used for stuff that is, well, provided). It would be nice if people who want to build a server with Gentoo but then reduce it to only true RDEPENDS could do so. Obviously they'd have to use binary packages to continue to maintain it (and even then they'd need to keep portage on it), or they'd have to build another one. Actually, the trend in general is towards disposable servers anyway so generating an entire new server every time one thing changes is probably a desirable thing, since you probably want to be able to do it every time you add a server anyway. Rich