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 TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 80A8A158041 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 03:20:29 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 6504BE2A80; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 03:20:24 +0000 (UTC) Received: from ciao.gmane.io (ciao.gmane.io [116.202.254.214]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (prime256v1) server-signature RSA-PSS (4096 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 340D1E2A76 for ; Thu, 4 Apr 2024 03:20:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1rsDeG-00037r-PJ for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Thu, 04 Apr 2024 05:20:20 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: Current unavoidable use of xz utils in Gentoo Date: Thu, 4 Apr 2024 03:20:14 -0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <875xwy8wxo.fsf@gentoo.org> 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 X-Auto-Response-Suppress: DR, RN, NRN, OOF, AutoReply Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Pan/0.155 (Kherson; 578af3b12) X-Archives-Salt: 1d1d0161-ebbc-4bcf-b5ee-d584108e4bb6 X-Archives-Hash: 3043b8b2a85956b939fe9c1cb7048846 Michael Orlitzky posted on Wed, 03 Apr 2024 12:40:26 -0400 as excerpted: > On Wed, 2024-04-03 at 16:30 +0100, Eddie Chapman wrote: >> It does involve a relatively small hack and functionality previously >> provided by xz-utils is replaced by app-arch/p7zip. > > I did the same thing with app-arch/unzip a long time ago. You caught a > lot of shit for your post, but I don't think it was out of line. > > Worst case? You spent a lot of time building a fragile solution to a > non-problem that everyone said you were crazy for wanting in the first > place. Hi, this is Gentoo, glad to have you. Gentoo as "meta-distro": Yes. I suspect many, perhaps most, Gentooers (individually or at the company level for corporate deployments) eventually end up doing their own thing to some degree or another. I haven't seen the term used much recently, but Gentoo can legitimately lay claim to "meta-distro", that is, a distro that makes it reasonably easy to do your own thing, creating a "mini-distro" for your own use. In fact it's reasonable to argue that (at least before the gentoo-mainstream binary packages became a thing) the relative costs of building it yourself likely ultimately lead most users who do /not/ need the meta-distro aspect to switch back to a more binary- inclined distro, perhaps arch if they still want a lot of flexibility, which means the ones that stick around on Gentoo for say a decade or longer tend to do so /because/ they ended up using that meta-distro aspect. In my own case my reverse-usrmerge ( /usr -> .) is certainly my biggest current meta-distro level divergence, tho historically, keeping USE=-semantic-desktop functionality alive locally during the period that the gentoo/kde project dropped it was an equally major divergence... but equally doable due to Gentoo's meta-distro aspect. Tho both would be rather harder were it not for git; I may not have done either one if git hadn't happened and svn was still king. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman