From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 10B5B1396D0 for ; Wed, 9 Aug 2017 15:33:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 94EBAE0D9E; Wed, 9 Aug 2017 15:33:34 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail1.obsidian-studios.com (mail.obsidian-studios.com [173.230.135.215]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2F899E0D47 for ; Wed, 9 Aug 2017 15:33:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 13813 invoked from network); 9 Aug 2017 15:33:32 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO assp1.obsidian-studios.com) (wlt-ml@::ffff:127.0.0.1) by ::ffff:127.0.0.1 with ESMTPA; 9 Aug 2017 15:33:32 -0000 X-Assp-Version: 2.5.5(17073) on assp1.obsidian-studios.com X-Assp-ID: assp1.obsidian-studios.com m1-92812-17925 X-Assp-Session: 2B75A64CF0 (mail 1) X-Assp-Envelope-From: wlt-ml@o-sinc.com X-Assp-Intended-For: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org X-Assp-Server-TLS: yes Received: from unknown ([2601:344:4100:1b0f:f2d5:bfff:feac:9077] helo=localhost) by assp1.obsidian-studios.com with SMTPSA(TLSv1_2 ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256) (2.5.5); 9 Aug 2017 11:33:32 -0400 Date: Wed, 9 Aug 2017 11:33:27 -0400 From: "William L. Thomson Jr." To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Prevent binary/non-compiled packages from binary package creation Message-ID: In-Reply-To: <61c59979-fc8d-9978-3d21-a2f66edb8f04@gentoo.org> References: <51802e5c-2dc2-3f08-e570-f6572a10dd33@gentoo.org> <61c59979-fc8d-9978-3d21-a2f66edb8f04@gentoo.org> Organization: Obsidian-Studios, Inc. X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.15.0-dirty (GTK+ 2.24.31; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) 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: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; boundary="Sig_/MvqHm_WSheejCKvrVEFjl59"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: f1f3e3ee-5913-448c-8933-7aef511a4829 X-Archives-Hash: 6843a7718bc202c26638689bbdcbc2f3 --Sig_/MvqHm_WSheejCKvrVEFjl59 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 9 Aug 2017 11:07:04 +1000 "Sam Jorna (wraeth)" wrote: > > What then is the benefit? If what is installed is the same from > > package manager or binpkg. Also your redistributing another's > > package in binary format which may not be legally allowed. =20 >=20 > The difference is that how the package manager/ebuild installs the > package may be better suited to the environment than what upstream > expects (such as upstreams that install through a .run file) I fail to see how basically skipping src_install and maybe some prepare stuff that makes it better suited to an environment. Can you explain that further? These packages are just exploded tarballs. I fail to see the benefit to repacking those into another tarball to be exploded. At best skipping src_install and/or prepare, seems to be the only difference. I see no difference in installing kernel sources via source ebuild or a binpkg, pre-built ebuild binary. Other than the time it takes to re-package the kernel sources into another tarball. --=20 William L. Thomson Jr. --Sig_/MvqHm_WSheejCKvrVEFjl59 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: OpenPGP digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iF0EARECAB0WIQTEeldqZjmVut8bVHJNcbKkg6ozUAUCWYsrRwAKCRBNcbKkg6oz UDxKAJ9IoefNtCnIN9oZBztqDTStxpVpRQCfYi2oveta+M7/FIyg7P+J6IoB1Zw= =rNUO -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/MvqHm_WSheejCKvrVEFjl59--