| 1 |
On Wednesday 23 July 2014 01:06:15 Tom Wijsman wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Tue, 22 Jul 2014 08:10:20 +0300 |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> Samuli Suominen <ssuominen@g.o> wrote: |
| 5 |
> > On 22/07/14 04:05, Rick "Zero_Chaos" Farina wrote: |
| 6 |
> > > And just for fun, since no one has mentioned it yet, dynamic deps |
| 7 |
> > > don't work at all on binpkgs since the Packages file contains the |
| 8 |
> > > deps (like vardb) and it doesn't get updated (just like vardb). |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> > Known long standing pitfall. It's managable. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> It is one of the reasons I see binpkgs as breaking progress instead of |
| 13 |
> being part of the progress; it is manageable, but it could be better. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
So you'd rather have people not using Gentoo because you can't agilely pivot |
| 17 |
your strategy mixin? |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Without binpkg support I'd feel the need to hack it up, just to get things |
| 20 |
fast enough. It's one of the features that haven't been made popular enough |
| 21 |
(eh, we could easily provide binpkg-updates for @system for all profiles and |
| 22 |
the most common arches (amd64, x86, maybe arm) - I've been running a cronjob |
| 23 |
doing that for x86+amd64 for about a year now) |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
This perspective of "I don't need it, thus it shouldn't exist" is quite ... |
| 26 |
amusing. |
Archives