Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo Weekly News Letter - "Where is Gentoo Linux 1.4"

[Jon Portnoy]

(Do you think you could fix word wrapping in your client? When reading 
mails it doesn't matter, but it screws up quoting on replies... hence 
this top-post)

We plan to have functionality to allow you to only merge security 
updates. I don't know the status of this...

On Tue, Jun 24, 2003 at 09:49:04PM -0700, Matt Thrailkill wrote:
> Has there been any talk of having an option to select a snapshot of the Portage tree to be pulled down during rsyncing?  Or perhaps even forks of the tree to represent stable, unstable, this version, that version?  I suppose the different profiles facilitate this somewhat, but it doesn't seem terribly granular.
>
> I think it'd be really great to be able to install Gentoo on a server box, and tell it "Keep the Portage tree locked to v1.4-Stable" and be confident that every time I update my world, I'm only getting critical bug and security fixes, that there is no risk of wildly different init scripts or config files coming down, or broken ebuilds, or silly snafu's of apps that suddenly don't work -- all of which seem to still occur even if I leave ACCEPT_KEYWORDS undefined.
>
> And then having that server locked to the specific release branch, I could rely on GRP packages rather than putting it under load when I need to install something, or at the least having to wait however long it may take to compile whatever it is.  And I know that because I'm sticking to the stable tree, I'm running the stuff that the maintainers have beat on and tested and that the maintainers have confidence in the reliability and quality of what was put in that release.
>
> On Wed, 25 Jun 2003 00:19:56 -0400
> Jon Portnoy <avenj@g.o> wrote:
>
> > You're correct. We use a snapshot of the tree to build stages. However,
> > stages have (relatively) few apps... most of them small.
>
> --
> gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list

-- 
Jon Portnoy
avenj/irc.freenode.net

--
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list