Mailing List Archive: Gentoo: OSX

OSX only packages: where to store them?

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

grobian at gentoo

Feb 19, 2006, 3:21 AM

Post #1 of 15 (7233 views)
Permalink

OSX only packages: where to store them?

Hi all,

I'm opening a discussion on this subject of where to store packages that
will only work on OSX. Examples of such packages are Dirk Shoenberger's
qt-mac package [1] (which works by the way), and a package I just made:
sharedmenuscocoa (which is a requirement to build Camino), and the
package I want to have: Camino itself. They all make no sense on
anything but OSX, and perhaps a tiny little bit on GNUstep environments,
but I doubt that for now.

Question for now is whether we want to add these packages to some
separate tree, either within or outside of Gentoo, or have them in the
main tree. In the latter case, we can make a separate category
(macos-only?) to put them in, or try to mix them in the tree (where
would qt-mac fit? and should it require a virtual because it provides
qt?)

Thoughts, opinions? I'd like to have Mozilla list on their site you can
use Gentoo for Mac OS X too, so that would require us to have the
packages they need in the tree :)

[1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/123240

--
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo for Mac OS X Project
--
gentoo-osx [at] gentoo mailing list

nathan.stocks at gmail

Feb 19, 2006, 8:10 PM

Post #2 of 15 (7015 views)
Permalink

Re: OSX only packages: where to store them? [In reply to]

On 2/19/06, Grobian <grobian [at] gentoo> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> I'm opening a discussion on this subject of where to store packages that
> will only work on OSX. Examples of such packages are Dirk Shoenberger's
> qt-mac package [1] (which works by the way), and a package I just made:
> sharedmenuscocoa (which is a requirement to build Camino), and the
> package I want to have: Camino itself. They all make no sense on
> anything but OSX, and perhaps a tiny little bit on GNUstep environments,
> but I doubt that for now.
>
> Question for now is whether we want to add these packages to some
> separate tree, either within or outside of Gentoo, or have them in the
> main tree. In the latter case, we can make a separate category
> (macos-only?) to put them in, or try to mix them in the tree (where
> would qt-mac fit? and should it require a virtual because it provides
> qt?)

My personal vote is to put them in the main tree in the appropriate
existing categories.

Assuming that you put them in the main tree--AFAIK, there are ebuilds
throughout the tree that only work on one architecture or another. I
can't emerge grub on gentoo-ppc, for example. If gentoo-osx is to act
like any other architecture, then ebuild storage/categorization ought
to follow the same conventions as all the existing architectures.
None of the existing ebuilds are categorized by "architecture that
this will run on."

If gentoo-osx is really going to move forward then let's get the
ebuilds into the real tree. Following the same conventions than all
the other architectures with regards to the main portage tree seems
like a wise decision to me.

Of course, if we can't use the main tree anyway because of prefix
issues, that would be different. But would you be asking this if
there were issues preventing using the main tree?

~ Nathan

--
gentoo-osx [at] gentoo mailing list

nathan.stocks at gmail

Feb 19, 2006, 8:10 PM

Post #3 of 15 (7026 views)
Permalink

Re: OSX only packages: where to store them? [In reply to]

gongloo at gentoo

Feb 20, 2006, 2:27 AM

Post #4 of 15 (7024 views)
Permalink

Re: OSX only packages: where to store them? [In reply to]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Feb 19, 2006, at 05:21, Grobian wrote:

> Question for now is whether we want to add these packages to some
> separate tree, either within or outside of Gentoo, or have them in the
> main tree. In the latter case, we can make a separate category
> (macos-only?) to put them in, or try to mix them in the tree (where
> would qt-mac fit? and should it require a virtual because it provides
> qt?)

Personally, I'd love to see a category (or multiple categories?) just
for software intended exclusively for Mac OS X. Might be a bit more
difficult to swing that by the rest of the developers, though...

-Hasan
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (Darwin)

iD8DBQFD+Yt6zsotBnB7jxgRAp4zAJ4oZg+Aqz6R0zOjoP8NCObD/HTTIgCgh56E
eAbI8uSmmxCBpQuZN8gQkGQ=
=939y
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
gentoo-osx [at] gentoo mailing list

macmonster at myrealbox

Feb 20, 2006, 4:14 AM

Post #5 of 15 (7026 views)
Permalink

Re: OSX only packages: where to store them? [In reply to]

>> Question for now is whether we want to add these packages to some
>> separate tree, either within or outside of Gentoo, or have them in
>> the
>> main tree. In the latter case, we can make a separate category
>> (macos-only?) to put them in, or try to mix them in the tree (where
>> would qt-mac fit? and should it require a virtual because it
>> provides
>> qt?)
>
> Personally, I'd love to see a category (or multiple categories?)
> just for software intended exclusively for Mac OS X. Might be a bit
> more difficult to swing that by the rest of the developers, though...

This implies there should also be a separate category for packages
that are suitable for Lunix only. In the ideal world, IMO, x11-libs/
qt should build on both platforms, behaving correctly whether it is
on MacOS or Linux; it is inelegant to require users on different
platforms to emerge different packages to get the same thing
(although for development reasons it might be reasonable to have an
x11-libs/qt-meta package that pulls in either linux-libs/qt or macos-
libs-qt as required).

Stroller.

--
gentoo-osx [at] gentoo mailing list

flameeyes at gentoo

Feb 20, 2006, 5:02 AM

Post #6 of 15 (7020 views)
Permalink

Re: OSX only packages: where to store them? [In reply to]

On Sunday 19 February 2006 11:21, Grobian wrote:
> Question for now is whether we want to add these packages to some
> separate tree, either within or outside of Gentoo, or have them in the
> main tree. In the latter case, we can make a separate category
> (macos-only?) to put them in, or try to mix them in the tree (where
> would qt-mac fit? and should it require a virtual because it provides
> qt?)
First "quick step" would be to put them on gentoo-alt overlay for the first
rounds, I thought we already discussed that.

Remember the past with other devs ranting because stuff was shoved into the
tree without enough testing, or with an audience so limited that likely
nobody would use them.

They should get into the tree at some point, but for the first stages they are
better to be tested outside it.

About categories... a sys-* category is not the case... qt-mac would probably
fill into dev-libs as there's not a precise category for it (x11-libs carries
the x11 versions).
That unless someone wants to find all the gui-libs that can work without x11
and move all of them in a gui-libs category :)

P.S.: a wxMac ebuild shouldn't be difficult to prepare, either.. when I wrote
wxlib eclass I had that in mind...
--
Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/
Gentoo/ALT lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE

dirk.schoenberger at sz-online

Feb 20, 2006, 5:30 AM

Post #7 of 15 (7021 views)
Permalink

Re: OSX only packages: where to store them? [In reply to]

>>
>> Personally, I'd love to see a category (or multiple categories?)
>> just for software intended exclusively for Mac OS X. Might be a bit
>> more difficult to swing that by the rest of the developers, though...
>
> This implies there should also be a separate category for packages
> that are suitable for Lunix only. In the ideal world, IMO, x11-libs/
> qt should build on both platforms, behaving correctly whether it is
> on MacOS or Linux; it is inelegant to require users on different
> platforms to emerge different packages to get the same thing
> (although for development reasons it might be reasonable to have an
> x11-libs/qt-meta package that pulls in either linux-libs/qt or macos-
> libs-qt as required).
>

The problem is that there exist a package x11-libs/qt, which already
builds fine on MacOS (with installed X libs), and which is generic, and a
package (apple-libs?)/qt, which uses Qt-Mac and native Aqua.
As long as no Aqua exists on Linux, this is Apple only.

Regards
Dirk
--
gentoo-osx [at] gentoo mailing list

stroller at stellar

Feb 20, 2006, 9:34 AM

Post #8 of 15 (7012 views)
Permalink

Re: OSX only packages: where to store them? [In reply to]

On 20 Feb 2006, at 12:30, Dirk Sch�nberger wrote:
>> ... In the ideal world, IMO, x11-libs/
>> qt should build on both platforms, behaving correctly whether it is
>> on MacOS or Linux; it is inelegant to require users on different
>> platforms to emerge different packages to get the same thing...
>
> The problem is that there exist a package x11-libs/qt, which already
> builds fine on MacOS (with installed X libs), and which is generic,
> and a
> package (apple-libs?)/qt, which uses Qt-Mac and native Aqua.
> As long as no Aqua exists on Linux, this is Apple only.

I'm not offering sample code but IMO the most elegant way to handle
this is with an "aqua" USE flag.

Stroller.

--
gentoo-osx [at] gentoo mailing list

dirk.schoenberger at sz-online

Feb 20, 2006, 10:07 AM

Post #9 of 15 (7025 views)
Permalink

Re: OSX only packages: where to store them? [In reply to]

>> The problem is that there exist a package x11-libs/qt, which already
>> builds fine on MacOS (with installed X libs), and which is generic,
>> and a
>> package (apple-libs?)/qt, which uses Qt-Mac and native Aqua.
>> As long as no Aqua exists on Linux, this is Apple only.
>
> I'm not offering sample code but IMO the most elegant way to handle
> this is with an "aqua" USE flag.
>

I like this idea, but not necessary for the Qt case.
Somehow the qt-x11 and the qt-mac libraries are different downloads with
different codebases.
So in order to build USE="aqua X" you would have to essentially download
and install two large archives.
Possibly qt-mac and qt-x11 are even mutually exclusive, i.e. they are
installed to the same place in the file system.

Regards
Dirk
--
gentoo-osx [at] gentoo mailing list

grobian at gentoo

Feb 20, 2006, 11:06 AM

Post #10 of 15 (7026 views)
Permalink

Re: OSX only packages: where to store them? [In reply to]

On 20-02-2006 18:07:34 +0100, Dirk Schönberger wrote:
> I like this idea, but not necessary for the Qt case.
> Somehow the qt-x11 and the qt-mac libraries are different downloads with
> different codebases.
> So in order to build USE="aqua X" you would have to essentially download
> and install two large archives.
> Possibly qt-mac and qt-x11 are even mutually exclusive, i.e. they are
> installed to the same place in the file system.

Yes, they should for sure block each other. In fact, qt-mac can even
partially use stuff from the x11 version.

--
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo for Mac OS X Project
--
gentoo-osx [at] gentoo mailing list

grobian at gentoo

Feb 24, 2006, 2:49 AM

Post #11 of 15 (7026 views)
Permalink

Re: OSX only packages: where to store them? [In reply to]

On 20-02-2006 13:02:49 +0100, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote:
> On Sunday 19 February 2006 11:21, Grobian wrote:
> > Question for now is whether we want to add these packages to some
> > separate tree, either within or outside of Gentoo, or have them in the
> > main tree. In the latter case, we can make a separate category
> > (macos-only?) to put them in, or try to mix them in the tree (where
> > would qt-mac fit? and should it require a virtual because it provides
> > qt?)
> First "quick step" would be to put them on gentoo-alt overlay for the first
> rounds, I thought we already discussed that.

I don't really understand your (over) reaction here. But alas.

> Remember the past with other devs ranting because stuff was shoved into the
> tree without enough testing, or with an audience so limited that likely
> nobody would use them.

I don't think anyone implied that we should do that immediately. I was
just asking for opinions. Not sure how I want to do it in the end.

> About categories... a sys-* category is not the case... qt-mac would probably
> fill into dev-libs as there's not a precise category for it (x11-libs carries
> the x11 versions).

True. Defenitely a better place for it. Problem remains with the
package still on micro level, that it "provides" qt somehow.

> P.S.: a wxMac ebuild shouldn't be difficult to prepare, either.. when I wrote
> wxlib eclass I had that in mind...

Might be a nice addition to the 'group'.

--
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo for Mac OS X Project
--
gentoo-osx [at] gentoo mailing list

grobian at gentoo

Feb 24, 2006, 2:56 AM

Post #12 of 15 (7031 views)
Permalink

Re: OSX only packages: where to store them? [In reply to]

On 21-02-2006 00:49:17 +0100, Marcin Gabrowski wrote:
> I think, that KEYWORD ppc-macos, very good descibes category of
> software which we want to use, and prepare and adjust for endusers.
> Such USE flags like X or -X, may pretty control process of compile
> source. Eg. I dont like X11-apps on OSX.

Yeah, I agree with that. Question here is, however, do we want
eventually to have mainline tree support for this (deviating more and
more from the "Linux" aspect of the tree) or do we want to keep it more
or less separate. Separating keeps purists happy, as they can either
RSYNC_EXCLUDE it, or just don't rsync the whole 'OSX-tree'. (giving
some examples)

I'm absolutely not sure about what the right attitude towards this
should be. It also addresses the question: what will Gentoo for Mac OS
X become? A better Fink, or just a tool that can build anything for OSX
from source? (think of Adium, Camino, Vim, etc. etc. next to all the
console applications)

--
Fabian Groffen
Gentoo for Mac OS X Project
--
gentoo-osx [at] gentoo mailing list

flameeyes at gentoo

Feb 24, 2006, 2:59 AM

Post #13 of 15 (7014 views)
Permalink

Re: OSX only packages: where to store them? [In reply to]

On Friday 24 February 2006 10:49, Grobian wrote:
> I don't really understand your (over) reaction here. But alas.
Er, I just said that we discussed that back with kito iirc, about not adding
to the tree more ebuilds until the situation is cleared up.

> I don't think anyone implied that we should do that immediately. I was
> just asking for opinions. Not sure how I want to do it in the end.
I was just remembering which kind of problems you/we have to cope with ;)

> True. Defenitely a better place for it. Problem remains with the
> package still on micro level, that it "provides" qt somehow.
A (versioned) virtual/qt wouldn't be a bad idea; remains the problem that many
things requires to use _X11_ Qt (especially for Qt3), so deps has to be
tweaked carefully.

--
Diego "Flameeyes" Pettenò - http://dev.gentoo.org/~flameeyes/
Gentoo/ALT lead, Gentoo/FreeBSD, Video, AMD64, Sound, PAM, KDE

nathan.stocks at gmail

Feb 24, 2006, 10:56 AM

Post #14 of 15 (7017 views)
Permalink

Re: OSX only packages: where to store them? [In reply to]

On 2/24/06, Grobian <grobian [at] gentoo> wrote:
> Yeah, I agree with that. Question here is, however, do we want
> eventually to have mainline tree support for this (deviating more and
> more from the "Linux" aspect of the tree) or do we want to keep it more
> or less separate. Separating keeps purists happy, as they can either
> RSYNC_EXCLUDE it, or just don't rsync the whole 'OSX-tree'. (giving
> some examples)

That got me thinking about portage rsync'ing in general. Is it/would
it be possible to rsync a subset of the portage tree based on
keywords? IE, only rsync things to my local gentoo server if they're
keyworded "~x86" or "x86" or "sparc", for example. That would be a
cool feature if there were a clean way to implement it. Reduce
syncing time and bandwidth usage on rsync mirrors.

> I'm absolutely not sure about what the right attitude towards this
> should be. It also addresses the question: what will Gentoo for Mac OS
> X become? A better Fink, or just a tool that can build anything for OSX
> from source? (think of Adium, Camino, Vim, etc. etc. next to all the
> console applications)

I've always wanted it to be like portage, just in a secondary package
manager role...including both fink/dp-type functionality PLUS cool
stuff like building anything for OSX from source. Of course, I also
want my powerbook to project holograms and absorb laser blasts, so
take that for what it's worth.

~ Nathan

--
gentoo-osx [at] gentoo mailing list

gaber at gaber

Jun 17, 2008, 1:42 AM

Post #15 of 15 (7024 views)
Permalink

Re: OSX only packages: where to store them? [In reply to]

Hi,

On 2006-02-20, at 19:06, Grobian wrote:

> On 20-02-2006 18:07:34 +0100, Dirk Schönberger wrote:
>> I like this idea, but not necessary for the Qt case.
>> Somehow the qt-x11 and the qt-mac libraries are different
>> downloads with
>> different codebases.
>> So in order to build USE="aqua X" you would have to essentially
>> download
>> and install two large archives.
>> Possibly qt-mac and qt-x11 are even mutually exclusive, i.e. they are
>> installed to the same place in the file system.
>
> Yes, they should for sure block each other. In fact, qt-mac can even
> partially use stuff from the x11 version.

I think, that KEYWORD ppc-macos, very good descibes category of
software which we want to use, and prepare and adjust for endusers.
Such USE flags like X or -X, may pretty control process of compile
source. Eg. I dont like X11-apps on OSX.

gaber

--
gg: 606 ripe: mg3051 jid: gaber/gentoo.pl http://gabrowski.pl/

Attachments:

PGP.sig (0.18 KB)

Index | Next | Previous | View Threaded

Interested in having your list archived? Contact Gossamer Threads