Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 391771 - Alternative config (PORTAGE_CONFIGROOT) does not consider PORTAGE_CONFIGROOT/etc/make.profile
Summary: Alternative config (PORTAGE_CONFIGROOT) does not consider PORTAGE_CONFIGROOT/...
Status: UNCONFIRMED
Alias: None
Product: Portage Development
Classification: Unclassified
Component: Core - Configuration (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: Normal normal (vote)
Assignee: Portage team
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2011-11-24 11:00 UTC by Nicolas Perrenoud
Modified: 2011-11-25 17:20 UTC (History)
0 users

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required: ---

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Nicolas Perrenoud 2011-11-24 11:00:46 UTC 
When I use an alternative config root (using env var PORTAGE_CONFIGROOT) and link a profile to PORTAGE_CONFIGROOT/etc/make.profile, it is not used, as always the default /etc/make.profile is evaluated first. If I delete /etc/make.profile, emerge exists with an error about not finding a profile. This is caused by emerge calling the config.validate() function (in /usr/lib/portage/pym/portage/package/ebuild/config.py) first with the / as config root even when PORTAGE_CONFIGROOT is set

Reproducible: Always
Comment 1 Zac Medico gentoo-dev 2011-11-25 17:20:03 UTC 
It actually uses both /etc/make.profile and $PORTAGE_CONFIGROOT/etc/make.profile. The reason is that /etc/make.profile is the "host" configuration, which is used to satisfy build-time dependencies (like gcc and whatnot).