Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Alec Warner <antarus@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Slimming down the portage tree [WAS: Assigning bugs to treecleaners]
Date: Tue, 27 Jun 2006 17:14:30
Message-Id: 44A12E55.9060505@gentoo.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Slimming down the portage tree [WAS: Assigning bugs to treecleaners] by Enrico Weigelt
Enrico Weigelt wrote:
> * Raphael Marichez <falco@g.o> schrieb: > > >>IMHO this seems a good idea. The portage tree is growing every week, >>every month, and it doesn't really suit for the very little systems >>(embedded linux) nowadays. Furthermore, with the old 2.0-portage, >>the syncing and caching had become really long. >>So this project sounds sane. It's rather new, isn't it ? > > > Why can't we just move the patches and other files besides the > ebuilds somewhere else ? Why can't they be downloaded on-demand ?
The point isn't space (we have plenty). The point is package foo has no maintainer and has problems. With no one to fix the issues, the package should be removed (to give users a decent experience by avoiding broken packages) and to increase security (by punting packages with security problems but have no one to fix them). It is all about manpower, I don't see a technical solution here. -- gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list