| 1 |
On Thu, 27 Jan 2011 16:30:12 +0000 |
| 2 |
Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Thu, 27 Jan 2011 10:19:51 -0600 |
| 5 |
> Jeremy Olexa <darkside@g.o> wrote: |
| 6 |
> > Probably OT, sorry. Isn't it time we gained this concept of "noarch" |
| 7 |
> > for packages that only install text files or packages that don't |
| 8 |
> > compile anything... |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> No, since there's no such thing as an app that's guaranteed to be |
| 11 |
> portable. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Good thing he said package then, not app. :P Text, pdf, html, image, or |
| 14 |
icon-only installing packages having no dependencies don't really need |
| 15 |
arch-specific keywords. I'd rather we just ignore keywording policies for |
| 16 |
these packages rather than introduce a new keyword though. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
-- |
| 20 |
fonts, gcc-porting, it makes no sense how it makes no sense |
| 21 |
toolchain, wxwidgets but i'll take it free anytime |
| 22 |
@ gentoo.org EFFD 380E 047A 4B51 D2BD C64F 8AA8 8346 F9A4 0662 |
Archives