| 1 |
Stephen P. Becker wrote: |
| 2 |
>> So (without a Portage tree) it replaces the oldgrown single-liner |
| 3 |
>> wget foo; tar -xzf foo; cd foo; ./configure; make; make install |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> Are you implying that there would be much more involved with anything |
| 6 |
> currently in the gentoo tree in the absence of portage? |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> /me cracks the bell |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
Er the discussion was about paludis without Gentoo ebuilds, not upstream |
| 11 |
software, or Gentoo without its package-manager(?!) If it's so great |
| 12 |
and "The Portage tree is not the only package repository out there..." why |
| 13 |
not prove it with a whole maintainable OS install using Paludis and zero |
| 14 |
Gentoo ebuilds? |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Personally, I'd do Paludis for sourcemage, although I don't know whether |
| 17 |
anyone would want to switch from the approved package manager on that |
| 18 |
distro either. Still, since it's so amazing, I am sure you would be able to |
| 19 |
prove it was better, and it would win on technical merit. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
(BTW posting links to an external website's code when specifically asked |
| 22 |
about algorithms on a developer list is bad form imo. It presumes on the |
| 23 |
time of your audience, some of whom actually work, and might have |
| 24 |
intellectual property constraints on whose code they can read. In future |
| 25 |
please just outline the algorithm for the issue at hand, if you have one.) |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives