| 1 |
On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 03:49:16PM -0500, Andrew Gaffney wrote: |
| 2 |
> Tim Yamin wrote: |
| 3 |
> >So if it can give the same end result, it can be a replacement. So hence |
| 4 |
> >paludis should be able to do what Portage + Catalyst now do. Which you've |
| 5 |
> >not-so-clearly said is not the case; unless paludis has now manifested |
| 6 |
> >the ability to generate bootable ISOs across nine architectures, which |
| 7 |
> >it clearly hasn't. Therefore paludis can not deliver the same end result |
| 8 |
> >as Portage. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Last I checked, Portage doesn't have the ability to generate bootable ISOs |
| 11 |
> across nine architectures, either :) |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Well, if you're going to have a package manager that delivers the same result |
| 14 |
as Portage it must therefore work with Catalyst... or it must replace catalyst. |
| 15 |
And according to Ciaran: |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
"" |
| 18 |
| #1. Can paludis work with catalyst? |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
No. Nor will it ever, nor will it need to. |
| 21 |
"" |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
... hence paludis would be required to do whatever "end result" catalyst |
| 24 |
produces (i.e. official release media) for it to be usable as an official |
| 25 |
package manager. |
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives