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 1Nolgm-00034n-M6 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 08 Mar 2010 22:44:40 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E76FCE0B58; Mon, 8 Mar 2010 22:44:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from qw-out-1920.google.com (qw-out-1920.google.com [74.125.92.145]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 44C47E0B24 for ; Mon, 8 Mar 2010 22:44:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: by qw-out-1920.google.com with SMTP id 14so842294qwa.10 for ; Mon, 08 Mar 2010 14:44:35 -0800 (PST) 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 Sender: antarus@scriptkitty.com Received: by 10.220.107.220 with SMTP id c28mr3269708vcp.74.1268088274658; Mon, 08 Mar 2010 14:44:34 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <1268088000.10198.20.camel@lillen> References: <201003041652.56521.tampakrap@gentoo.org> <1268068400.10824.36.camel@localhost> <1268088000.10198.20.camel@lillen> Date: Mon, 8 Mar 2010 14:44:34 -0800 X-Google-Sender-Auth: c6dd7547d412dc85 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Reorganizing handling of target specific profiles (Was: Split desktop profile patches & news item for review) From: Alec Warner To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 7bbf2831-59f0-40e0-9c30-1872b789f3c6 X-Archives-Hash: 674fb01d03941c8b531a4c25318132b8 Hehe, http://dev.gentoo.org/~antarus/essays/mixin-profiles.txt -rw-r--r-- 1 antarus users 2653 Jun 4 2006 mixin-profiles.txt -A On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 2:40 PM, Peter Hjalmarsson wrot= e: > m=C3=A5n 2010-03-08 klockan 19:13 +0200 skrev Mart Raudsepp: > >> Instead I think we should be improving "eselect profile" to support >> multiple inheriting /etc/make.profile files in a user friendly fashion, >> and in the end removing 249 subprofiles, instead of adding 28+. >> > > > I vote for this one. A profile being a only contains what is interesting > for that profile, and you can "stash together" some profiles into your > own cocktail. > Yeah, I know it sounds horrible, but it would still be better then to > only be able to focus on one small set. > > For example if I am using the GNOME DE, and have someone other also > using my computer, but who really wants to use KDE. Should I have to > find out what from the KDE profile to enable in my env to make my > GNOME-profile also tingle for KDE? > > I think having a set of "base profiles" for toolchains and alike (i.e. > default, hardened) would be good. Then be able to add for example > desktop/gnome or server and/or selinux profiles on top would be > interesting. This also for maintainers, as for example PeBenito can > focus on the selinux part of the profiles, and do not have to keep up to > date with which hardened-compilers are currently masked/unmasked. > > > >