On 07-10-2007 16:37:21 -0600, Joe Peterson wrote:
> >> 1) Limit tool options to those that are common to all tool variants
> >> 2) Port a standard (i.e. GNU) set of tools to all platforms
> >> 3) Force all gentoo ports to use GNU userland
...
> > No, it is not. The problem IMHO is in the "user" userland and the
> > "portage" userland are being seen as one. I think it would be very easy
> > to install all GNU equivalents of tools on BSD in some separate dir, put
> > it in portage's DEFAULT_PATH before /bin and /usr/bin and all would work
> > perfectly well from the ebuild/eclass perspective.
>
> Yep, that's option #2, and I think that could work - a subset of
> commands in their GNU variants used by portage. It means formalizing
> the official set of tools allowed for use in ebuilds (I'm not sure if
> the dev guide really codifies this or not, even though it gives a list
> of such tools).
Ok, then I misunderstood. Most important thing is that we agree that
this looks like it /is/ the way to go.
> What I meant above is that #3, which would be changing all of userland
> itself to GNU, would be major and undesirable. Having the option of a
> complete GNU userland would be an interesting option/project, but it's a
> good thing to have the flexibility to have any userland desired, as long
> as portage has a way of being consistent (i.e. via something like #2).
If you want a GNU userland on FreeBSD, Solaris, Darwin, etc. I think you
should look at Prefix where [[ ${USERLAND} == "GNU" ]] always holds. ;)
--
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo on a different level
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
