Portage 2.1 to adopt RPM format for LSB compliance
GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Gentoo's Portage 2.1 to adopt RPM format for LSB compliance
Portage 2.1 to adopt RPM format for LSB compliance
In what will likely prove to be a controversial decision, Portage 2.1 will adopt the RPM format for all packages moving forward. The use of ebuilds will be deprecated in favor of the defacto RPM standard. The primary driver for this decision was to ensure compliance with the Linux Standard Base specification, which mandates RPM support for package management.
The developers have been hard at work to make this migration as easy as possible. Already a proof-of-concept ebuild2rpm script is in place and being tested by a pilot group of developers. Unfortunately, because of the architectural differences between the two formats, some features will not be supported once Gentoo moves to RPM. USE variables are one such feature; sandbox security is another. However, the added benefit brought about by full LSB compliance should far outweigh the loss of these two minor features.
Additionally, because of LSB's required library support, the xfree86 package will move to become part of the base Gentoo Linux system, rather than an optional addition. Users interested in learning more about the Linux Standard Base should read the LSB FAQ or the full LSB 1.3 specification.
-------------------------------------
The only thing I can say about this is: %&! #&^%(@# $*%(#@) Gentoo %($%& )#$%^&# ^$@*%^!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!111
Last edited by KungFuHamster; 03-31-2003 at 11:22 PM.
I completely agree this is what made gentoo much different than other distros. I happen to like the idea of compiling my software from source this is rather depressing.
Originally posted by KungFuHamster Thanks for ruining the surprise, arse.
Perhaps creating a link to GWN instead of copying-pasting would be much easier Anyhow this is no joke for a gentooer... I nearly had a heart-attack reading this so I thought I should warn the next readers.
Bah! RPMs are awesome and great! Especially when they are broken beyond all imagination (read: SuSE RPMs)! I mean, who doesn't like RPMs? They work great and are easy to build!
PS: I'm back! Gentoo broke, so a friend gave me Mandrake 9.1, which really is great (thats not April Fools, that is the truth).
Had fun with heads on this one on irc all day.
Sorry to hear your gentoo broke, crichards, hope you're enjoying mandrake. Just had to add, mine broke too, and I've just done a new install (my first from the stage3 tarball) and I'm amazed at how much more quickly it's been going. it's taken 3 days to get as far as I've always got in a week. RC3 rocks. Also thanks to GWN for the heart failure!
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.