FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.

» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Gentoo > Gentoo Development

LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 11-19-2009, 11:26 PM
Denis Dupeyron
Default Gentoo Prefix: on EPREFIX, ED and EROOT inside ebuilds

On Sun, Oct 18, 2009 at 2:11 AM, Fabian Groffen <grobian@gentoo.org> wrote:
> This is a formal apology for springing that onto you.

Thanks a lot. Not everybody can do such a thing as a public apology. I
will nonetheless ask the council to vote on the following during next
Ask Fabian to change his signature from:
"Gentoo on a different level"
"Failure in a different level"

2009/10/18 Tomáš Chvátal <scarabeus@gentoo.org>:
> Why on earth portage simply does not detect the prefix enviroment is being run
> and then INTERNALY switch D->ED and other variables.

If that means we can get away without touching ebuilds, apart from
changing their EAPI variable, then that's absolutely what we have to
do. I'd like things to be done the right way though (see below).

On Fri, Nov 13, 2009 at 4:43 AM, Ulrich Mueller <ulm@gentoo.org> wrote:
> However, there is need for additional discussion. From the council
> meeting log I could extract the following open questions:

It would be preferable for the discussion to happen on this list
before the meeting or we'll end up postponing again due to having more
questions coming up at that time.

> 2. Should the Prefix team be allowed to do the necessary changes to
> ebuilds themselves, or should it be done by the respective
> maintainers?

I think here it's obvious that anybody who is an ebuild dev and sees
anything to fix (prefix or else) is encouraged to go ahead and do it,
as we've always done. The recommendation is and will always be to talk
to the current maintainers out of politeness and to be extra careful
(i.e. usually letting the maintainers do it) in case of
system/tricky/exotic package. We don't give full cvs access to the
whole tree to all ebuild devs for nothing.

> 4. EAPI numbering: Would this simply be added as an additional
> feature to EAPI 3? Or should we have an intermediate EAPI slot,
> e.g. 2.1 or 3 (and current EAPI 3 renamed to 4 in the latter
> case)?

Here I'd add to the choices: why not release an intermediate EAPI with
the prefix stuff and whatever that has already been done for EAPI3?
The exact name of a potential intermediate EAPI is a non-problem.
However I would prefer if it were a number like 2.1 or 2.5 or even 3,
because although we currently treat the EAPI variable as a simple
string we may change our mind later and find it handy someday to use
operators on them such as >=2.1.

> 5. Who is going to write the exact specification (PMS patch) for
> this EAPI feature?

I thought I asked Fabian to work on that at the end of the meeting. In
case I didn't then consider this as me officially asking him if he can
take care of it. Fabian is this OK with you?

Also I think it would be nice if somebody took care of a portage
patch, since I hear it is rather simple. Fabian again? Or Zac? Any
other volunteers?

I would prefer to have all the pieces in places before the next
meeting so that we can vote on the real thing and have prefix
implemented the right way before the end of the year.

> 6. (Any question that I've missed?)

Here are a few that I gathered from others (my comments are between

> How are dynamically linked set*id programs going to work?

> How are scripts using #!shebangs going to work?
> You write an ebuild, and you DEPEND upon >=foo-3, because the build
> process includes some foo code. The foo code is executed via
> scripts using #!/usr/bin/foo. Normally, this is fine.
> But on prefix, /usr/bin/foo might be a crappy, OS X mangled foo-2
> that's no good. So even though you've got the foo-3 dep met, it'll be
> met in /opt/Gentoo/blah, so your package will fail.

> How are ebuilds to be marked as supporting prefix or not?
(Here I'm guessing that changing the EAPI variable will do)

> Why is there only a single permitted installation path?
(I'm under the impression this is a limitation of the windows
installer but not of prefix itself. So patching the installer would
fix that)

> What exactly is expected from a prefix-compliant package manager to
> support full prefix installs, as opposed to just supporting installs
> to / with prefix-aware ebuilds?
(The PMS patch should answer that)

Old 11-25-2009, 10:43 PM
Denis Dupeyron
Default Gentoo Prefix: on EPREFIX, ED and EROOT inside ebuilds

Things seem to be progressing nicely on this front. We have answers to
the questions people had and they look satisfactory to me.

One thing that I think would be valuable is a document that explains
the average dev how to make his/her ebuilds prefix compliant with
links to more details when necessary. I understand that there's the
trivial situations and the less trivial ones. In the latter case it
would be nice to explain why the case isn't trivial and how to fix it.
Using python as an example could be one way to do it. I'm thinking of
something practical that could possibly be patched into devmanual. If
such a document already exists then please just point us to it.

On Fri, Nov 20, 2009 at 2:03 AM, Fabian Groffen <grobian@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> I thought I asked Fabian to work on that at the end of the meeting. In
>> case I didn't then consider this as me officially asking him if he can
>> take care of it. Fabian is this OK with you?
> Yes, I agreed coming up with some patch. *I admit I haven't yet even
> looked into it.

Great, thanks. If you can have it ready some time before the meeting
so that all devs can get a chance to review it before the council
members vote on it that will be even better. If you need help don't
hesitate to contact me. I'll try and look for the right people to help
you depending on what you need.

> Technically, Portage trunk already contains the most important bits that
> allow us to continue since yesterday. *The rest is waiting for a formal
> approval of the council, and then it will most probably be me and Zac
> fighting to get the prefix branch merged into trunk.


> Next to that, it is part of the Prefix team's job to make sure that
> whatever is installed, does not reference the host system when this is
> not absolutely necessary.

Could you give some examples of when it is absolutely necessary?

Old 11-25-2009, 11:01 PM
Denis Dupeyron
Default Gentoo Prefix: on EPREFIX, ED and EROOT inside ebuilds

It looks like this question is still unanswered:

On Thu, Nov 19, 2009 at 5:26 PM, Denis Dupeyron <calchan@gentoo.org> wrote:
>> How are dynamically linked set*id programs going to work?


Thread Tools

All times are GMT. The time now is 08:08 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org