| 1 |
On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 10:33:34 +0200 |
| 2 |
Tiziano Müller <dev-zero@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
> Another ugly solution: Having the EAPI on a per-package (like |
| 4 |
> $portagedir/cat/package-1) or per-tree basis |
| 5 |
> ($portagedir/profiles/eapi) and start providing our tree as overlays |
| 6 |
> of more than one tree (will end up in a mess of dependencies, but it |
| 7 |
> would still be nice to specify the EAPI for a complete overlay |
| 8 |
> instead of having the name all the ebuilds like .eapi-X :-). |
| 9 |
> In addition: it wouldn't be possible to identify the EAPI of an |
| 10 |
> ebuild by just looking at it... |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Kills the upgrade path completely. No good. |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
-- |
| 15 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives