Re: virtual/{posix,stage1,2,3} Was: [gentoo-dev] Add bc back to the stage3

2014-10-15 Thread Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto
On Fri, 10 Oct 2014, Rich Freeman wrote: On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 5:31 PM, W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us wrote: On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 09:22:18PM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote: In a similar vein, would releng be open to moving stage1/2/3 package sets to virtual packages or package sets?

Re: virtual/{posix,stage1,2,3} Was: [gentoo-dev] Add bc back to the stage3

2014-10-15 Thread W. Trevor King
On Thu, Oct 16, 2014 at 12:13:45AM +, Jorge Manuel B. S. Vicetto wrote: For stage1 and stage2 the *order* we build packages is relevant. Is this really true? The stage1 is being built with ROOT, so it's only using the seed stage3 packages. It's hard to have cyclic dependencies when you're

virtual/{posix,stage1,2,3} Was: [gentoo-dev] Add bc back to the stage3

2014-10-10 Thread Robin H. Johnson
On Sun, Sep 28, 2014 at 12:31:16PM -0400, Richard Yao wrote: May I suggest an alternative? We could implement sys-virtual/posix and make it depend on all packages that are not necessary for @system, but are necessary for proper POSIX compliance. Then we can tell users who need/want an

Re: virtual/{posix,stage1,2,3} Was: [gentoo-dev] Add bc back to the stage3

2014-10-10 Thread W. Trevor King
On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 09:22:18PM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote: In a similar vein, would releng be open to moving stage1/2/3 package sets to virtual packages or package sets? Presently they are inside catalyst, and I think this would clean things up a lot. They're already in the Portage tree

Re: virtual/{posix,stage1,2,3} Was: [gentoo-dev] Add bc back to the stage3

2014-10-10 Thread Rich Freeman
On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 5:31 PM, W. Trevor King wk...@tremily.us wrote: On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 09:22:18PM +, Robin H. Johnson wrote: In a similar vein, would releng be open to moving stage1/2/3 package sets to virtual packages or package sets? Presently they are inside catalyst, and I

Re: virtual/{posix,stage1,2,3} Was: [gentoo-dev] Add bc back to the stage3

2014-10-10 Thread W. Trevor King
On Fri, Oct 10, 2014 at 09:45:37PM -0400, Rich Freeman wrote: Obviously this entails work on somebody's part, but would it still make sense to make the stage build process more generic along the lines Robin suggested? That is, instead of having 3 specific places we use to generate a