Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Zac Medico <zmedico@g.o>
To: gentoo-releng@l.g.o, "M. J. Everitt" <m.j.everitt@×××.org>, gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: moving default location of portage tree
Date: Mon, 09 Jul 2018 22:54:50
Message-Id: 50aa6222-d97c-6fd0-0884-23b27f494135@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: moving default location of portage tree by "M. J. Everitt"
1 On 07/09/2018 03:27 PM, M. J. Everitt wrote:
2 > On 09/07/18 23:12, Zac Medico wrote:
3 >> On 07/09/2018 02:34 PM, Kristian Fiskerstrand wrote:
4 >>> I'd mostly argue any such change should only affect new systems
5 >>>
6 >> Yes, changing defaults for existing systems would be annoying.
7 >>
8 >> My recommendation is to have catalyst set the new defaults in the stage
9 >> tarballs.
10 >>
11 >> When sys-apps/portage changes its internal defaults, I'd like for the
12 >> upgrade process to call a tool that generates configuration files when
13 >> necessary to ensure that the existing paths remain constant.
14 > I think it should be possible for RelEng to make a start on catalyst
15 > updates - is there anything that would inhibit going ahead with this,
16 > potentially?
17
18 No, nothing. Whatever catalyst puts it the default config will become
19 our new default.
20 --
21 Thanks,
22 Zac

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] rfc: moving default location of portage tree William Hubbs <williamh@g.o>