| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
hgerstung
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 22 Nov 2004
Posts: 123
Location: Northwestern Germany (OWL)
|
 Posted: Fri Mar 24, 2006 12:18 pm Post subject: What about GLEP21 - is someone already/still working on it? |
 |
|
So, how can I check the status of GLEP21? It is nearly 2 years old and its GLEP status is advertised as "Draft", which I would understand as "Well, it was suggested but no one decided whether it should be implemented or not"...
I wonder if I could use a little bash scripting (I never looked into Phyton...) to simply swap the "world" file and then run
"set_emerge core-apps -up" which would simply do this
1. mv world world.org
2. mv core-apps world
3. emerge $2 $3 $4 $5 $6 $7 world
4. mv world core-apps
5. mv world.org world
This way I could simply handle as many "world" files as I want. Well, I guess I'll do it this way 
Anyhow, where can I check the status of a GLEP? Any docs on that?
Thanks,
Heiko |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Genone
Retired Dev
Joined: 14 Mar 2003
Posts: 9527
Location: beyond the rim
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2006 2:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
The main issue with set support is integrating it into emerge properly and the emerge codebase being a bunch of spaghetti code.
In the meantime you can (ab)use bash to emulate sets like this:
| Code: | $ cat ./mylist
sys-devel/gcc
sys-libs/glibc
sys-apps/portage
$ emerge -p --noreplace $(< ./mylist)
These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
Calculating dependencies... done!
[ebuild U ] sys-libs/glibc-2.4-r1 [2.3.6-r3] USE="nptl* nptlonly*"
$ emerge -p $(< ./mylist)
These are the packages that would be merged, in order:
Calculating dependencies... done!
[ebuild R ] sys-devel/gcc-3.4.6
[ebuild U ] sys-libs/glibc-2.4-r1 [2.3.6-r3] USE="nptl* nptlonly*"
[ebuild R ] sys-apps/portage-2.1_pre6-r6
|
No need to move the worldfile around.
And regarding default USE flags or usage profiles:
I don't know what you're complaining about, that stuff already exists. Your /etc/make.profile symlink points to a profile providing certain defaults. And if you think that there aren't enough profiles: write your own and share it with others. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hgerstung
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 22 Nov 2004
Posts: 123
Location: Northwestern Germany (OWL)
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 25, 2006 8:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
Yes, but by exchanging the world file a new package would be automatically added. But thanks for your suggestion! That is really a simple and easy way of dealing with individual package lists.
Regards,
Heiko |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dol-sen
Retired Dev
Joined: 30 Jun 2002
Posts: 2805
Location: Richmond, BC, Canada
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 26, 2006 5:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
I am in the middle of adding sets support to porthole. I have the main updates section re-worked and mostly funtional. I will add the needed code to scan the /etc/portage/sets directory for package sets. It will then check each set {system, userset, world, dependencies} to see if an updated package belonds in which set listing. I suppose it would not be that difficult to add packages in a set that are not installed as well as the upgradable ones. I'll report back here when I have it working in cvs.
_________________
Brian
Porthole, the Portage GUI frontend irc@freenode: #gentoo-guis, #porthole, Blog
layman, gentoolkit, CoreBuilder, esearch... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bobobo
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 122
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 8:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
just as a side-note, you should really avoid a script like :
1. mv world world.org 2. mv core-apps world 3. emerge $2 $3 $4 $5 $6 $7 world 4. mv world core-apps 5. mv world.org world
What if you call the script, and cancel the script for some reason during the emerge, and call the script again ? you'd have overwritten the real world file by core-apps. The usage of symlinks is much safer ;o |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Genone
Retired Dev
Joined: 14 Mar 2003
Posts: 9527
Location: beyond the rim
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 11:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bobobo wrote: | | The usage of symlinks is much safer ;o |
Symlinks and safe? You're joking, right? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bobobo
Tux's lil' helper
Joined: 24 Nov 2005
Posts: 122
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 12:00 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| well... safe in the sense that at least you can't delete the wrong files if all the script does is manipulate symlinks... i'm not saying it's a good solution, just that it's less 'worse', now if you can enligthen me as to why one shouldn't do that, please do |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Genone
Retired Dev
Joined: 14 Mar 2003
Posts: 9527
Location: beyond the rim
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 27, 2006 1:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bobobo wrote: | | well... safe in the sense that at least you can't delete the wrong files if all the script does is manipulate symlinks... i'm not saying it's a good solution, just that it's less 'worse', now if you can enligthen me as to why one shouldn't do that, please do |
Maybe not with rm, but with mv/cp you can still be in for some trouble. Generally if you use symlinks in scripts you have to know your tools in detail, as some work on the symlinks directly and some on the file the symlink is pointing to (I've been in for a surprise more than once).
For example in portage development symlinks are often a cause for trouble (my personal favourite: absolute symlinks and collision-protect -> infinite loop)
If you're just dealing with files in a single directory hardlinks are generally safer to use. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Omega21
l33t
Joined: 14 Feb 2004
Posts: 788
Location: Canada (brrr. Its cold up here)
|
| Posted: Wed Apr 12, 2006 5:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
I think it would be a really good idea, although I wouldn't personally use it.
_________________
iMac G4 1GHz :: q6600 //2x 500GB//2GB RAM//8600GT//Gentoo :: MacBook Pro//2.53GHz |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
Gentoo Chat
