| 1 |
On 12/24/06, Mike Myers <fluffymikey@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Please tell me there's some solution to this? I haven't seen one mentioned |
| 3 |
> anywhere yet. Even with Gentoo's occasional problems, I like it too much to |
| 4 |
> use any other distro but I'd definitely like to see better version |
| 5 |
> management than what its got, which is none. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
The ideal solution to this would be released tree versions...so you |
| 8 |
could use the 2006.1 tree instead of the live development tree. Note |
| 9 |
that profiles wouldn't help much here, as then the profile would have |
| 10 |
to contain a list of all the possible packages that can be installed |
| 11 |
with the relevant versions. And it creates a lot of complications for |
| 12 |
package removals, additions, etc. But to have a snapshot of the tree |
| 13 |
to which only security or other minor fixes would be applied would be |
| 14 |
ideal for the problem you describe. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
The usual argument against this is that most devs prefer working on |
| 17 |
the live tree. Having to maintain a released tree and backport fixes |
| 18 |
to it would take time away from things they would rather be doing |
| 19 |
(like working on new cool stuff). The fear is that the released trees |
| 20 |
could have serious security holes in them that might never get fixed. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
But in fact this has been discussed many times among devs. For the |
| 23 |
most recent discussion, search the gentoo-dev mail list archives for |
| 24 |
"Versioning the tree" (and ignore the flames). I haven't reviewed the |
| 25 |
discussion, but as I recall a couple of devs may be working on making |
| 26 |
this a reality, possibly for the 2007.X releases. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-Richard |
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives