| 1 |
> > I thought it was called Debian? ;o) |
| 2 |
> > |
| 3 |
> > Or perhaps, "I'd eat meat, if only it were vegetarian" |
| 4 |
> > |
| 5 |
> > Seriously though, I don't see the point, unless you want to sell more |
| 6 |
> > T-Shirts, there are a plethora of good binary distributions of linux out |
| 7 |
> > there already and all the downsides you list are what, imo, define |
| 8 |
> > Gentoo. |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > I'd prefer to see gentoo improved as a source-based distribution |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Ditto. There is no point to a binary version of Gentoo. If you want that |
| 13 |
> then as Michael said just use Debian. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
I don't agree. Gentoo already supports binary packages anyways (emerge -b / |
| 17 |
emerge -k). We're only talking about improving it AFAIK.. What's wrong with |
| 18 |
improving some features of portage if it's possible and if it won't hurt |
| 19 |
anyone? |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives