Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Donnie Berkholz <dberkholz@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] proxy-dev (an alternative to sunrise?)
Date: Fri, 28 Jul 2006 18:56:40
Message-Id: 44CA5CC2.5000404@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] proxy-dev (an alternative to sunrise?) by Robert Cernansky
1 Robert Cernansky wrote:
2 > If I have some application that is not included in portage why
3 > I decide to make an ebuild? Because I hope that then it will be
4 > accepted and included to portage, so maintained by developers (big
5 > thanks for this). If I have to take care of package + ebuild +
6 > dependencies, I'll rather choose not to make an ebulid but compile
7 > package right from .tar.gz archive.
8
9 Many people disagree with you here, that's why overlays exist. Somebody
10 wants to use Portage to manage ebuilds that aren't yet in the actual tree.
11
12 Thanks,
13 Donnie

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] proxy-dev (an alternative to sunrise?) Robert Cernansky <hslists2@××××××.sk>
Re: [gentoo-dev] proxy-dev (an alternative to sunrise?) Alastair Tse <liquidx@g.o>
Re: [gentoo-dev] proxy-dev (an alternative to sunrise?) Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@g.o>