Linked by Eugenia Loli on Sun 16th Dec 2007 00:04 UTC, submitted by obsethryl
Gentoo A relatively lengthy Q&A with Ciaran McCreesh about Paludis, the Portage alternative for Gentoo.
Thread beginning with comment 291463
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Snifflez
Member since:
2005-11-15

"It was death by growing pains, predominantly because Gentoo didn't offer a binary derivative to appeal to the crowd that thinks they're hobbyists but really just wants a distribution that makes a bit more sense under the covers."

This just doesn't make any sense: why would Gentoo need to offer a binary distro based on itself? That's like saying that Microsoft failed because they never opened up their source code. Microsoft isn't about opening up its code and Gentoo isn't about being a binary distro.

Reply Parent Score: 2

butters Member since:
2005-07-08

why would Gentoo need to offer a binary distro based on itself?


Because there's an obvious demand for a binary distro based on Gentoo. The Gentoo Project doesn't necessarily need to be the steward of such a derivative. Think more along the lines of the Debian/Ubuntu relationship. Genbuntoo, if you will.

Reply Parent Score: 3

Colonel Panic Member since:
2005-07-28

Sorry, but if you want Gentoo you will have to build it the old fashioned way-the way it was meant to be. You are defeating the core purpose of Gentoo with this idiotic idea of Genbuntoo.

Dammit, the original poster already explained this and you still cannot parse his logic. If you want *buntu install THAT!

Reply Parent Score: 1

Snifflez Member since:
2005-11-15

"Because there's an obvious demand for a binary distro based on Gentoo."

Umm... But Gentoo isn't a binary distro. To take full advantage of Gentoo's features, the derived distro would _absolutely_ have to be source-based. How can you have the awesomeness that is conditional compilation in a binary distro? I mean, think about this -- the package in question has about 50 use flags, which means, that there are (2 to the power of 50) ways to compile it, right? A binary package maintainer for such distro would have to maintain an insane amount of package variations -- like a quadrillion or so.

My point is: what exactly do you mean by "Gentoo-based binary distro"? Optimizations? Gentoo isn't about CFLAGS, really. USE flags? Fine, but how can one implement every possible USE flag configuration for a given package?

Reply Parent Score: 1

butters Member since:
2005-07-08

You're missing the point. In a binary distribution based on Gentoo, the packages would be prebuilt with a default make.conf. The user would have the option of building from source with custom CFLAGS/USE if they wish, but most users would be fine with the binary package most of the time.

It would be just like regular Gentoo, except you have the option (possibly the default) to install binary packages built with fairly conservative CFLAGS and fairly inclusive USE flags.

If you're familiar with Arch Linux, imagine more of that kind of binary/source hybrid packaging concept but based on Gentoo's ebuild tree, Portage/Paludis package management, and the rest of the Gentoo platform.

Reply Parent Score: 2