Re: [gentoo-dev] development-sources are not 'development'

[Peter Gordon]

Couldn't we just use different ebuild versions?

# emerge ">=gentoo-sources-2.6"
# emerge "=gentoo-sources-2.4.27"

Or something similar? Would that work?

Travis Tilley wrote:
> if we must keep the 2.6 kernels seperate, i suggest that we at least
> change the name of the package. it's incredibly confusing to have your
> stable kernel named 'development-sources' or 'gentoo-dev-sources', and
> there are archs like amd64 that just dont support 2.4 in any way. plus
> with the new change in kernel development, mm-sources has become the
> official development tree.
>
> does anyone object to renaming development-sources to linux26-sources?
> perhaps a similar name change for gentoo-dev-sources and
> hardened-dev-sources?
>
>
> Travis Tilley <lv@g.o>
>
> --
> gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list
>

-- 
()  The ASCII Ribbon Campaign - against HTML Email,
/\  vCards, and proprietary formats.
---------------------------------------------------
Peter A. Gordon
E-Mail: admin@×××××××××××××××××.com
GPG Public Key ID: 0x109DBECE
GPG Key Fingerprint (SHA1):
   E485 E2F7 11CE F9B2 E3D9 C95D 208F B732 109D BECE
---------------------------------------------------
I digitally sign (using GnuPG) every email I write.
If this or any other email that you recieve from me
   is not signed, or has a bad OpenPGP signature,
   please notify me. Thank you. --Peter
---------------------------------------------------