On Wednesday 16 February 2005 01:17, Marius Mauch wrote: > Personal opinion: This splitting (and all the other subpackaging) is one > of the main reasons why I don't use redhat (or other binary distros) > anymore. I can see the use (so don't try to convince me with examples), > but personally I hate it. If we would go on and change the main tree to > split packages this way I'd probably leave Gentoo too (this isn't meant > as a threat in any way). Don't know how other people feel about this.
That's a pretty strong reaction ;-) > And then what? You have the files separated in the sandbox, but how are > you going to use that? Generate two binary packages, only merge the > devel stuff with FEATURES=devel-files, ...? Generate two binary packages. As Robin says, this is pretty trivial stuff, once the dependency system enhancements are figured out. > For the latter there is > already INSTALL_MASK to avoid installing unwanted files (new feature). That's no good if I want to build once, deploy everywhere. > For the first I don't really see the use unless you also change the > dependency system. /me nods. > Btw you don't really need to put the logic in the ebuilds, development > stuff can nearly always be matched with a simple find command (headers, > static libs. Urgh. No thanks. Sometimes implicit is good, but when you're talking about the packages for the operating system, I'll pass on that implementation. Best regards, Stu -- Stuart Herbert [EMAIL PROTECTED] Gentoo Developer http://www.gentoo.org/ http://stu.gnqs.org/diary/ GnuPG key id# F9AFC57C available from http://pgp.mit.edu Key fingerprint = 31FB 50D4 1F88 E227 F319 C549 0C2F 80BA F9AF C57C -- -- [email protected] mailing list
