On Sun, 2011-07-17 at 22:43 -0500, Donnie Berkholz wrote: > On 13:11 Sun 17 Jul , Michał Górny wrote: > > The other side effect is the 'gentoopm' project [2,3], providing > > an unified API to access all three PMs mentioned earlier. Right now, my > > main focus is implementing new interfaces there, and moving the code > > out of PMSTS to it. > > > > Right now, gentoopm has already made its first release into the tree, > > and became used in smart-live-rebuild [4]. It is already able to find > > packages in basic kinds of repositories, get their metadata and read > > environment.bz2 files. It can work with atoms too. > > > > I'd like to make it able to construct (and use) PM tool calls for > > various operations like installing and uninstall packages. It's going > > to use a flexible interface, making it easy to fit into various working > > environments -- printing argv, running through subprocess, glib event > > loop, threads and so on. > > You might be interested in checking out what parts of the portage API > are used by the Gentoo PackageKit backend, and making sure those are > supported in gentoopm. Even more interesting would be completing a port > of the PK backend to gentoopm. This latter part is clearly beyond the > scope of your project, but it would be really useful after the summer > ends. > Hey, i could use some help in creating the emerge action portion of the portage public api. I had been holding off for a bit until the difference between the portage and pkgcore backends got resolved in porthole. I do have an early partial port of the packagekit backend. Zac has also done a quick review and given some direction for it. If your up for it, let me know -- Brian Dolbec