Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship




Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date. GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.
c.f. bug 424647
List Archive: gentoo-pms
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-pms: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: gentoo-pms@g.o
From: Lars Hartmann <lars@...>
Subject: Re: xpak documentation
Date: Sun, 01 Feb 2009 16:18:26 +0100
I am wondering about the following two points:
     1. Is there an effort to define a standard for binary packages
        especially the way how the metadata are attached?
     2. Are there any other alternatives to xpak?
Am Sonntag, den 01.02.2009, 14:53 +0000 schrieb Ciaran McCreesh:
> On Sun, 01 Feb 2009 11:48:41 +0100
> Lars Hartmann <lars@...> wrote:
> > i have stumbled across this document a few days ago and realized that
> > there is no documentation for the xpak format as used in gentoo binary
> > packages.
> 
> Mm, that's because I'm not convinced the binary format Portage uses
> just now is standard-worthy. I'd rather keep PMS restricted in scope.
> 
-- 
/"\    ASCII Ribbon Campaign
\ /    Respect for low technology.
 X     Keep e-mail messages readable by any computer system.
/ \    Keep it ASCII. 
Attachment:
signature.asc (Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil)
References:
xpak documentation
-- Lars Hartmann
Re: xpak documentation
-- Ciaran McCreesh
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-pms: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
Re: xpak documentation
Next by thread:
Some improvements
Previous by date:
Re: xpak documentation
Next by date:
Some improvements


Updated Jul 18, 2012

Summary: Archive of the gentoo-pms mailing list.

Donate to support our development efforts.

Copyright 2001-2013 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Contact us.