On Wed, 2009-11-25 at 15:08 +0000, Jeremy Olexa wrote:
> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 14:41:09 +0000, Alan Hourihane <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > On Wed, 2009-11-25 at 08:18 -0600, Jeremy Olexa wrote:
> >> All -
> >> Heads up. Historically, the prefix tree contained *only* ebuilds that
> >> were tested to work. As such, they had "prefix" style keywords.
> >> (~amd64-linux, ~ppc-macos, etc). Going forward, our tree will be having
> >> more and more ebuilds that have not been tested to work with prefix.
> >> That is, no prefix keywords but maybe ~amd64, ppc, etc. You cannot set
> >> your ACCEPT_KEYWORDS to "amd64" and expect an unchecked ebuild to just
> >> work for prefix.
> >> I've seen more than one person on IRC ask about this, a guaranteed way
> >> to set yourself up for failure. If an ebuild is missing your *prefix*
> >> keyword, then it needs to be fixed and file a bug for the working
> >> package. (We do not have the manpower/motivation to fix all the
> >> ourselves)
> >> Here is some help:
> >> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/gentoo-alt/prefix/techdocs.xml
> >> http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/gentoo-alt/prefix/ecopy.xml
> >> Please ask if you need help with something.
> > Just a question on this.
> > Are we going to see portage merged in with mainline ?
> Are you talking about prefix-portage (the package) or portage (the tree)?
> If the latter, its already being done (what this email is about) and you
> a prefix and gentoo linux user haven't noticed so I guess it is pretty
> If you are talking about the package, then it is being worked on. No ETA.
The package. So good to know it's being worked on. Thanks.