6 ms·

Probably because the Gentoo ecosystem (package tree, package managers) is build for source packages and not for binary packages.

by JepZ 8y ago

neuland 8y ago
Do you know if pacman is available on Chrome OS? My understanding is that it's based on Gentoo but it's heavily modified. So adding a different binary-based package manager isn't that crazy of an idea, especially for Google.
- totallysnowman 8y ago
  Two package managers are a bad idea. They would need to cooperate somehow. Pacman developers probably have heard of Gentoo, but I wouldn't call it "based on Gentoo".
  - neuland 8y ago
    I meant that since pacman is not available, then use a different one entirely (not both). It seems it's a moot point b/c of the sibling comment saying the disk is read-only.
- cbhl 8y ago
  Chrome OS puts the core operating system on a read-only partition, which is why people have been using chroots in developer mode up until now.
darkr 8y ago
Portage can work with binary packages just fine: https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Binary_package_guide https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Binary_package_guide ChromeOS/ChromiumOS uses portage for its build system, to produce a signed, read-only image that the OS can boot from. CoreOS uses the same tooling FWIW: http://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/build http://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/build This is why you can’t just install random packages onto the parent OS. Any additional software needs to run in some overlay filesystem or sandbox.
- JepZ 8y ago
  I have never tried using portage with binary packages, but I am using Paludis with binary packages since a while and I have to say it is very different from using Apt or Pacman. Package managers which are build for source packages (e.g. ebuilds/exheres) have a much more complicated logic running in the background, come up with much harder to solve problems and are a lot slower (orders of magnitude). The only aspect where this setup is superior than e.g. arch + pacman is when it comes to using source packages on the same system. So I guess that is nothing you would like to use on a Chromebook anyway. Therefore, using a Debian container is a reasonable choice, in my opinion.

Probably because the Gentoo ecosystem (package tree, package managers) is build for source packages and not for binary packages.

by JepZ 8y ago

Probably because the Gentoo ecosystem (package tree, package managers) is build for source packages and not for binary packages.

neuland 8y ago

Do you know if pacman is available on Chrome OS? My understanding is that it's based on Gentoo but it's heavily modified. So adding a different binary-based package manager isn't that crazy of an idea, especially for Google.

totallysnowman 8y ago
Two package managers are a bad idea. They would need to cooperate somehow. Pacman developers probably have heard of Gentoo, but I wouldn't call it "based on Gentoo".
- neuland 8y ago
  I meant that since pacman is not available, then use a different one entirely (not both). It seems it's a moot point b/c of the sibling comment saying the disk is read-only.
cbhl 8y ago
Chrome OS puts the core operating system on a read-only partition, which is why people have been using chroots in developer mode up until now.

darkr 8y ago

Portage can work with binary packages just fine: https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Binary_package_guide https://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Binary_package_guide ChromeOS/ChromiumOS uses portage for its build system, to produce a signed, read-only image that the OS can boot from. CoreOS uses the same tooling FWIW: http://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/build http://www.chromium.org/chromium-os/build This is why you can’t just install random packages onto the parent OS. Any additional software needs to run in some overlay filesystem or sandbox.

JepZ 8y ago
I have never tried using portage with binary packages, but I am using Paludis with binary packages since a while and I have to say it is very different from using Apt or Pacman. Package managers which are build for source packages (e.g. ebuilds/exheres) have a much more complicated logic running in the background, come up with much harder to solve problems and are a lot slower (orders of magnitude). The only aspect where this setup is superior than e.g. arch + pacman is when it comes to using source packages on the same system. So I guess that is nothing you would like to use on a Chromebook anyway. Therefore, using a Debian container is a reasonable choice, in my opinion.