| 1 |
Chris Bainbridge posted <623652d50603230447l4938aaeam@××××××××××.com>, |
| 2 |
excerpted below, on Thu, 23 Mar 2006 12:47:13 +0000: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Adding the ebuilds to overlays is one option, but |
| 5 |
> then other users will be expected to find an overlay with their |
| 6 |
> package in, and then add it to make.conf. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
... This hints at something I wasn't aware of. Does it mean that portage |
| 9 |
already supports remote overlays, using them as it would a local overlay |
| 10 |
only over HTTP/FTP/RSYNC, the the appropriate URL placed in make.conf, or |
| 11 |
must the user manually sync the overlay to a local dir using whatever |
| 12 |
protocol and let portage access the overlay from there? I had assumed a |
| 13 |
separate manual sync was necessary. Was I assuming incorrectly? Can it |
| 14 |
be as simple as putting the URL in make.conf? Wouldn't that be rather |
| 15 |
resource intensive in terms of portage access to the remote server? Or |
| 16 |
was the step of acquiring a local copy of that overlay simply omitted and |
| 17 |
a reference to that local copy, not the global instance, assumed, when |
| 18 |
mentioning putting it in make.conf? |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
-- |
| 21 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
| 22 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
| 23 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman in |
| 24 |
http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/22/rms_interview.html |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives