| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On Tuesday 22 June 2004 23:54, Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
| 5 |
> Aron Griffis said: |
| 6 |
> > The only thing I really dislike about the "marked keyword" |
| 7 |
> > approach is that it requires changes in the *user's* portage to |
| 8 |
> > handle the marking. But only solutions III and IV avoid that so |
| 9 |
> > far. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> This is really a pretty annoying problem. As far as I can see, it would |
| 12 |
> require some hacking backwards compatibility fake profiles to exist at |
| 13 |
> "default-+x86-1.4" and so forth to avoid breaking everyone's systems with |
| 14 |
> old portages. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Could you explain this, Donnie - please!? I'm not that deep into portage, that |
| 17 |
I know, what has to be changed in profiles and why it is a that big problem, |
| 18 |
that they could not be migrated smoothly. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Just had another thought about the "re-arranging arch" option. How do you |
| 21 |
implement this in a differend backend, e.g. a database, Aron? |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Carsten |
| 25 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 26 |
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
iD8DBQFA2LwpVwbzmvGLSW8RAm5JAKCwZGgzcOph3kH+fdNXMQHEih/zeQCgnwUn |
| 29 |
FyvhGXcBIoCUkgCcSla76Eo= |
| 30 |
=va+l |
| 31 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives