1 |
Robert Paskowitz wrote: |
2 |
> Also, if you planned on using a setup |
3 |
> like this, there wouldn't really be a need to have the source in your |
4 |
> home directory as well. |
5 |
|
6 |
I hack on the source in my home directory. I take automatic backups of my home |
7 |
directory. I don't really want to hack in /usr/portage/distfiles/ or take |
8 |
backups of that. I might not want portage to do a "cvs update" of the sources |
9 |
when I ask it to merge the ebuild - I might be deliberately lagging a few |
10 |
revisions behind. |
11 |
|
12 |
> Most cvs ebuilds I've seen are nearly identical to a non-cvs ebuild. |
13 |
|
14 |
This is one element of redundancy that I'd like to address. |
15 |
|
16 |
> Having portage take your own tree from a particular user's |
17 |
> home directory on the other hand seems like a bit of a stretch, and no |
18 |
> necessarily all that useful. |
19 |
|
20 |
I would find this useful, but perhaps the things I'm thinking of are just |
21 |
suited to my style of working rather than a general development scenario. |
22 |
|
23 |
Daniel |
24 |
-- |
25 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |