Gentoo Archives: gentoo-server

From: stephen white <steve@×××××××××××××××.au>
To: gentoo-server@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-server] requirements for a more stable portage tree
Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2004 07:00:44
Message-Id: 2AB4AD80-5D29-11D8-8CC3-000393B7D972@cs.adelaide.edu.au
In Reply to: [gentoo-server] requirements for a more stable portage tree by Kurt Lieber
1 On 12/02/2004, at 11:10 AM, Kurt Lieber wrote:
2 > * All ebuilds in this 'frozen tree' are guaranteed to be available for
3 > a
4 > certain period of time so admins can plan their upgrades more
5 > accurately.
6
7 There should be multiple baselines, so I can rebuild servers to what
8 Gentoo was a year ago, two years ago, or 6 months ago. If I have a 2
9 year old server, I shouldn't be forced to update packages because I
10 want to rebuild the system to clean it up.
11
12 --
13 steve@×××××××××××××××.au
14
15 CRICOS Provider Number 00123M
16 ------------------------------------------------
17 This email message is intended only for the addressee(s)
18 and contains information that may be confidential and/or
19 copyright. If you are not the intended recipient please
20 notify the sender by reply email and immediately delete
21 this email. Use, disclosure or reproduction of this email
22 by anyone other than the intended recipient(s) is strictly
23 prohibited. No representation is made that this email or
24 any attachments are free of viruses. Virus scanning is
25 recommended and is the responsibility of the recipient.

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-server] requirements for a more stable portage tree Chris <taskara@××××××××××××.net>
Re: [gentoo-server] requirements for a more stable portage tree Kurt Lieber <klieber@g.o>