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 alway

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 al

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

2019-07-31 Thread James Le Cuirot
On Wed, 31 Jul 2019 21:40:19 +0100 James Le Cuirot wrote: > So why does ROOT affect it? Normally you install the packages for > BDEPEND, DEPEND, and RDEPEND to the same location. If BDEPEND and > RDEPEND are installed to different locations (ROOT!=/) then DEPEND will > almost always be installed

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

2019-07-31 Thread James Le Cuirot
On Wed, 31 Jul 2019 15:51:58 +0200 Alexis Ballier wrote: > On Tue, 30 Jul 2019 23:26:27 +0100 > James Le Cuirot wrote: > > > > Admittedly without a full understanding of the problem, but this > > > looks wrong to me: SYSROOT, EPREFIX and BROOT are only relevant in > > > build phases (src_*); (E

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

2019-07-31 Thread Alexis Ballier
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA256 On Tue, 30 Jul 2019 23:26:27 +0100 James Le Cuirot wrote: > > Admittedly without a full understanding of the problem, but this > > looks wrong to me: SYSROOT, EPREFIX and BROOT are only relevant in > > build phases (src_*); (EPREFIX is a little spe

[gentoo-dev] Re: [PATCH] eclass/cmake-utils.eclass: restrict rpath hack to Prefix/rpath

2019-07-31 Thread Michael Haubenwallner
On 7/15/19 2:45 PM, Michael Palimaka wrote: > On 7/12/19 3:14 AM, hero...@gentoo.org wrote: >> From: Benda Xu >> >>    Prefix/standalone does not need it. >> --- >>   eclass/cmake-utils.eclass | 2 +- >>   1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/eclass/cmake-utils.eclass b/