| 1 |
On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 09:22:45PM +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, 17 May 2006 16:12:09 -0400 Daniel Ostrow <dostrow@g.o> |
| 3 |
> wrote: |
| 4 |
> | Unfortunately in this case there is only one cat, he has only one skin |
| 5 |
> | and there is only one knife with which to skin him. Chris asked if |
| 6 |
> | paludis can build a release (meaning an official Gentoo release), |
| 7 |
> | which means following the Release Guidelines to the letter. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> If you look at it that way (which isn't what he actually asked to begin |
| 10 |
> with), then the question is "is Paludis identical to Portage?", which |
| 11 |
> it clearly isn't. A more useful question is "can Paludis give the same |
| 12 |
> end result as Portage?". |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
So if it can give the same end result, it can be a replacement. So hence |
| 15 |
paludis should be able to do what Portage + Catalyst now do. Which you've |
| 16 |
not-so-clearly said is not the case; unless paludis has now manifested |
| 17 |
the ability to generate bootable ISOs across nine architectures, which |
| 18 |
it clearly hasn't. Therefore paludis can not deliver the same end result |
| 19 |
as Portage. |
| 20 |
-- |
| 21 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives