Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Stroller <GentooGimp@×××××××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Ebuilds not getting in :(
Date: Thu, 24 Apr 2003 00:37:37
Message-Id: 49401.192.168.1.70.1051144378.squirrel@gentoo.lan
1 On Tuesday, April 22, 2003, at 02:17 pm, Peter Ruskin wrote:
2
3 > On Tuesday 22 Apr 2003 13:59, Frantz Dhin wrote:
4 >> ... maybe we could make a
5 >> new keyword? x86 for stable, ~x86 for unstable, and ^x86 for lunatic?
6 >> :)
7 >
8 > I couldn't agree more!
9
10 Me, either! I don't know that "lunatic" is the best word, but it seems
11 to me that an additional hierarchy [0] allows for a framework more
12 flexible & extensible for end lusers. As I understand it builds with the
13 arch keyword are tested and Gentoo-approved, those with the ~arch are
14 those which Gentoo are actively or philosophically committed to seeing
15 become approved; consequently those in the ^arch would become
16 "contributed & unsupported", those for which no dev has the time or
17 interest for.
18
19 > Perhaps cx86 for contributors' ebuilds?
20
21 I think this is reserved for a Honda moped, a step-through with an
22 undersized & water-cooled transverse v-twin engine, shaft drive & a
23 cumbersome (if reliable) arrangement of cam-chain AND push-rods. The
24 previous suggestion of ^arch [1] is MUCH better, IMO, and provides no
25 obstacle to Honda migrating their systems to Gentoo Linux, should they
26 wish.
27
28 Stroller.
29
30
31
32 [0] Is that the right word?
33 [1] Am I correctly appreviating "^86, ^PPC or whatever" here? I'm not
34 doing too well tonight.
35
36
37 --
38 Enjoyed this post? Thanks for reading - Give me a job!
39 Technical support / system administration
40 Linux / Unix / Windows / Mac OS X.
41
42
43
44 --
45 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] Ebuilds not getting in :( George Shapovalov <george@g.o>