Re: [gentoo-dev] Paludis and Profiles

[Ciaran McCreesh]

On Thu, 18 May 2006 09:19:58 +0200 Jochen Maes <sejo@g.o> wrote:
| 1) If Paludis has no business in replacing portage on systems (shame,
| if it's better/faster it should) why are we having this discussion.

It's a goal towards which we're working. Just as we expect that, for
example, gcc 4 will someday replace gcc 3 on some archs.

| I understand that you need a profile and with an overlay you need to 
| copy the profiles dir (the whole profiles dir) but be serious that's
| only So my question would you be able to do tests without changing
| the official tree by copying the profiles dir in an own overlay.

That's how things are done at present.

| 2) If Paludis will be installed on a system to test, and installs 
| packages, will portage be aware of that installation, and will it be 
| able to remove it (meaning Paludis changes the portage VDB correctly 
| when needed). (i've seen you explain that Paludis can read it but not 
| that it can write it correctly)

It's not that Paludis doesn't write it correctly. It's that Paludis
writes some extra information that Portage can't handle.

| 3) If using an own binary format will there be an extracter for it
| that isn't part of Paludis? Why am i asking this? Well i've seen
| instances when an upgrade broke something, and that was a dep of
| portage. So my emerge couldn't revert back. So i just untarred the
| tarball and recompiled it. (might not be the cleanest way, but the
| only way i found in certain situations).

tar.

| 4) Will Paludis ever become a Gentoo Project?

Pretty unlikely, past events considered. Personally I kind of like
having commit access to my own code...

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh
Mail            : ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk


-- 
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list