Google SoC 2008

[Daniel J. Luke]

On Mar 2, 2008, at 10:58 PM, Jordan K. Hubbard wrote:
> On Mar 2, 2008, at 4:58 PM, Randall Wood wrote:
>
>> I would like to see MacPorts use RPM for its installation database
>> instead of whatever we have now.
>
> We don't have anything now.  We've also tried to use rpm at various
> times in the past, but the impedance matching requirements have always
> proved problematic (rpm expects its packages to be built via srpms and
> dependencies to be handled in a very specific way, just to name two of
> many).
>
> My personal opinion is that we should start building xar files.

You already can build xar files with archive mode (although I don't  
believe that it supports any of xar's more interesting features).

> For the second cut, we can embed a minimal macports runtime (in the
> form of a universal dylib and some collection of tcl files) in each
> xarball, allowing us to run the same install/post-install/activate/
> post-activate routines at install time.

I think landon tried this a long time ago and it ended up that the  
'minimal' runtime was basically all of macports.

As an alternative, if we either keep the portfile api relatively  
stable and/or make use of our ability to version the portsystem we may  
be able to make things work (most of the time) by simply requiring  
macports to be installed on the system that wants to use the binary  
xar package.

The archives built now already contain a copy of the portfile used to  
generate them (although they're currently not used anywhere).

> how to provide the same
> activate/deactivate metaphor for packages that has always held us up

Given how the activate/deactivate system works now, it offers no real  
advantage over having binary packages. (I know, you want to have the  
dependencies make use of the versions installed by this method, but I  
still don't see it as a net advantage).

--
Daniel J. Luke
+========================================================+
| *---------------- dluke at geeklair.net ----------------* |
| *-------------- http://www.geeklair.net -------------* |
+========================================================+
|   Opinions expressed are mine and do not necessarily   |
|          reflect the opinions of my employer.          |
+========================================================+



-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PGP.sig
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 194 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.macosforge.org/pipermail/macports-dev/attachments/20080303/6dc72367/attachment.bin