Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PMS] [PATCH] Correct the definition of ESYSROOT as EPREFIX isn't always applicable

2019-07-31 Thread Benda Xu
Hi James, James Le Cuirot writes: >> > What if we want to bootstrap a brand new prefixed system using the >> > crossdev system as SYSROOT? This is the distinct SYSROOT case. The >> > problem is that there is no distinct variable for SYSROOT's prefix >> > and, as already stated, ESYSROOT is

Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: [PMS] [PATCH] Correct the definition of ESYSROOT as EPREFIX isn't always applicable

2019-07-31 Thread James Le Cuirot
On Tue, 30 Jul 2019 23:50:21 +0800 Benda Xu wrote: > > A check was added to Portage to ensure this held. Myself, the > > ChromiumOS team, and others have since been caught out by this check > > when trying to bootstrap brand new systems from scratch. You cannot > > bootstrap with no headers at

[gentoo-dev] Re: [PMS] [PATCH] Correct the definition of ESYSROOT as EPREFIX isn't always applicable

2019-07-30 Thread Benda Xu
Hi James, Sorry that I have re-ordered your text. > A check was added to Portage to ensure this held. Myself, the > ChromiumOS team, and others have since been caught out by this check > when trying to bootstrap brand new systems from scratch. You cannot > bootstrap with no headers at all! The