1 |
On 30-04-2008 21:21:06 +0300, Alon Bar-Lev wrote: |
2 |
> On 4/30/08, Fabian Groffen <grobian@g.o> wrote: |
3 |
> > I think in that sense Cygwin is more Open Source, because how you get |
4 |
> > the primary shell/environment is available too. However, for me that |
5 |
> > doesn't matter, as the OS itself is inherently non-free in that sense, |
6 |
> > so that's what you have to accept first thing anyway. |
7 |
> |
8 |
> I separate operating system and applications... Just like you run on |
9 |
> HPUX or AIX... There is Windows. |
10 |
|
11 |
Ok, then SFU is just your entry point to the system, like your "login" |
12 |
on AIX or HPUX. |
13 |
|
14 |
> > Just for your information, we don't do stages at the moment, not in the |
15 |
> > forseeable future from my point of view either. Binpkgs are in the |
16 |
> > planning. In general we just do a full bootstrap, on Interix you need |
17 |
> > extra help from "prefix-launcher". |
18 |
> |
19 |
> This is sad... I would really like to see fully operating portage on |
20 |
> Windows... It was more important to me in the past when I actually |
21 |
> used this OS... |
22 |
|
23 |
Well... making stages takes time, but more importantly, requires you to |
24 |
store them somewhere, and infra has no space for that. I do, but my |
25 |
internet connectivity is not sufficient for that. |
26 |
Besides, using Portage's binary support is more flexible, as the Prefix |
27 |
isn't fixed, but adjusted to your need(s). |
28 |
|
29 |
> I this sense [1] was a great idea! You could always use quickpkg to |
30 |
> extract binaries. |
31 |
|
32 |
I probably misunderstand. quickpkg creates binpkgs, doesn't it? |
33 |
|
34 |
> [1] http://gentoocygwin.sourceforge.net/ |
35 |
|
36 |
|
37 |
-- |
38 |
Fabian Groffen |
39 |
Gentoo on a different level |
40 |
-- |
41 |
gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list |