Alan McKinnon wrote: > On Wednesday 25 November 2009 19:20:43 Chuck Robey wrote: >> I need to get an up-to-date version of eclipse working on my gentoo >> box. First question is, is there a Galileo (3.5+) version of eclipse >> available as a portage package? I can't find it, so I'd really appreciate >> a pointer. The only thing I can see is a fairly old eclipse version (I >> think a year or more out of date). >> >> Second question, at the eclipse website, I see a binary version of the >> latest Linux-eclipse (the version I'm after). If I *can't* get a portage >> package version of Galileo-eclipse, then if I install the binary package >> (non-portage) from the eclipse website, can I get (and how can I get) >> portage to consider this package as supplying any dependency which would >> be otherwise supplied by the latest (ganymede, 3.4+) portage version of >> the eclipse tool
Several comments about answers here. First, to Marcus Wanner, yes, the first two eclipse packages work for 3.5, but they AREN'T eclipse, they are plugins for eclipse (plugins for what I really want). The 3rd is eclipse-sdk, the only one you don't cover and the only one I really need. Of course I know how to handle them, but without having eclipse itself, it's not useful. It *seems to me that Mark Knecht is telling me that there's no way the binary from the eclipse site would work, so he tells me how to install the two which do me no good. Again, this isn't helpful. The 3rd package is (in your own mail) still stuck at 3.4.x, and that's the real eclipse sdk. Alan McKinnon's response, below, seems to be telling me that I really should go ahead and try to use the binary from the eclipse site, and not to worry about getting into dependency problems with portage. Normally, most package tools from any OS get truly destructive if you fail to their tools ONLY, so I was hoping to find some way to effectively lie to portage, keep portage from getting upset. Seeing as I've gotten no advice on how to hoodwink portage, I just went ahead and used the 3.5.1 (x86-64) version of their Linux(x86-64) binary eclipse package, and it's working just fine. I had to get the sun-jdk installed (portage at least didn't offer me any problems here) and (at least until I run into more eclipse packages) it all seems to be working. If think that perhaps I can mask off everything from portage regarding any eclipse package, and maybe that will lessen my chances of having portage step on my system for me. This just occurred to me, and maybe it's the only thing I can do. > > Have you considered simply installing the binary eclipse into ~ and > maintaining it using the bundled eclipse tools? This removes portage out of > the equation entirely - no fooling around with *provided > > That is the method used by most Linux users and it's highly unlikely it won't > work - gentoo doesn't do weird things with where libs etc are stored. > > Plus, you have the advantage of being to install plugins directly from > eclipse > without having to become root and run emerge. It the same order of magnitude > as using Firefox to install it's own plugins. >
