| 1 |
On Tuesday 10 August 2004 02:05, Kurt Lieber wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, Aug 09, 2004 at 06:15:42PM -0400 or thereabouts, Dylan Carlson |
| 3 |
wrote: |
| 4 |
> > I think it would be fine to allow people to do it this way, and some |
| 5 |
> > people already do, but I don't think it should be part of Enterprise |
| 6 |
> > Gentoo. Profiling isn't complex. Trying to support the millions of |
| 7 |
> > different ways people can set up overlays is. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> I agree with Dylan here. While a tarball approach is certainly one |
| 10 |
> possilbe approach, requiring security ebuilds to be housed in an overlay |
| 11 |
> adds an extra layer of complexity. The profiling solution is easier given |
| 12 |
> the way our tools (mainly portage) currently operate. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
While I don't care about tarball vs. rsync (both don't matter that much to me) |
| 15 |
I don't think a profile is a solution. It would contain too many packages. |
| 16 |
Further it would still need maintenance for new packages as packages that are |
| 17 |
not pinned in the profile are available freely |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Paul |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
Paul de Vrieze |
| 23 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 24 |
Mail: pauldv@g.o |
| 25 |
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net |
Archives