Using Paludis with prefixed portage?

[SirRobin2318]

Hi,

I'm currently using prefixed portage on Mac OS X.
I stumbled upon this: http://paludis.pioto.org/
Paludis is a package manager that uses the portage tree.
Has anybody tried using it instead (or with) the current portage prefix?

Apparently Paludis has things like ${root} which make sense for a prefix use.
http://paludis.pioto.org/configuration.html:

root, which specifies the install root for packages and the real configuration directory

http://paludis.pioto.org/faq.html#why:

Why not fix Portage?

The Portage codebase is too broken to be fixed. It is a huge mess of spaghetti procedural code with no underlying design. It relies upon weird quirks in its own behaviour all over the place, so any change is liable to cause huge breakage in seemingly unrelated areas. It is almost entirely undocumented, and the internal names are perverse and often do not reflect what the code now does.

If portage really is that ugly, trying to hack the code some more to put a $EPREFIX variable doesn't seem such a great idea anymore...


Has anybody already looked into this?
Or can think of any good reasons why this is not possible/a good idea?

[spb]

At present Paludis doesn't have the necessary package manager support to work with the prefix ebuilds. I for one would be interested to see if it could be done without muddying the codebase too much, though you may find resistance to getting changes merged. If someone has the time and inclination though, I'd be interested to see how it fares.

[grobian]

ROOT support is not the same as PREFIX support.

I don't have any personal interest in getting Paludis to do prefix stuff, but don't let that discourage you to try and see if you can get it working.