1 |
On Wed, 17 May 2006 15:57:39 +0000 (UTC) "Duncan" |
2 |
<1i5t5.duncan@×××.net> wrote: |
3 |
| Patrick McLean <chutzpah@g.o> posted |
4 |
| 446B306C.5040901@g.o, excerpted below, on Wed, 17 May 2006 |
5 |
| 10:17:16 -0400: |
6 |
| |
7 |
| > Deprecated profiles are considered unsupported, as are most of the |
8 |
| > gentoo-alt profiles. Also most arches have development profiles |
9 |
| > which are considered unsupported (on amd64 we add a profile.bashrc |
10 |
| > that dies unless something like I_WANT_TO_BREAK_MY_SYSTEM=1 is set). |
11 |
| |
12 |
| ... And the proposal included a deprecated file. By that definition, |
13 |
| therefore, the profile would be unsupported, and the point you were |
14 |
| making disappears. |
15 |
|
16 |
To work around Portage, not because the profile is deprecated in the |
17 |
conventional sense. |
18 |
|
19 |
-- |
20 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
21 |
Mail : ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk |
22 |
|
23 |
|
24 |
-- |
25 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |