Hi peter, thanks for your answer .... On Thu, 2008-09-04 at 00:35 +0200, Peter Stuge wrote: > Marcus Priesch wrote: > > i know catalyst is out there, but i doubt it is flexible enough ... > > but i would be fine off if you could teach me different ... > > I like catalyst and use stage4 for all targets. > > The nice thing about catalyst is 1. it's automated and 2. you can > pick and choose at which files you want to delete.
yes, but thats exactly what portage and rsync also can handle ;) > > i also thought about building bin-pkgs and distributing them on the > > targets ... > > I'd like this too. In practice, catalyst uses tbz2s behind the > scenes, so everything doesn't have to be rebuilt every time. yes, but what about after a emerge --sync ?!?! - the problem with working with "outdated" portage trees is - despite that you dont have all the bugs fixed - that the .tgz's become unavailable after some time .... thats why i want to stay "tuned" ... furthermore updating a 2 year old gentoo system could be very time consuming .... thats also a reason why i want to stay up to date ... and i doubt that catalyst really supports this in a better way than plain portage does ... at least the reusability of the components is no plus than either ... > > is it possible to kepp all the .h and doc stuff out of a bin-pkg ?!?! > > Right, this is a good question, catalyst just makes tbz2s of the > normal packages and applies cleanup stuff at the end, so the tbz2s > themselves are not very deployable. yup ... what about "config-protect" - can this be "mis"used for such a function ?!?! regards, marcus.
