| 1 |
On Thursday 18 May 2006 20:03, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Thu, 18 May 2006 19:47:55 +0200 Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@g.o> |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> wrote: |
| 5 |
> | On Thursday 18 May 2006 18:19, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 6 |
> | > By that argument, future Portage versions aren't compatible with |
| 7 |
> | > current Portage, and so are not a candidate for Portage replacement. |
| 8 |
> | |
| 9 |
> | The primary package manager has different standards to adhere to as |
| 10 |
> | any other. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> There is no such thing as a primary package manager and using such a |
| 13 |
> term only serves to distract from what could otherwise be productive |
| 14 |
> discussion. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Why so. Portage is the one and only (thus primary) package manager for the |
| 17 |
gentoo tree. It is by itself responsible for the database of installed |
| 18 |
packages. This responsibility can only be held by one package manager at the |
| 19 |
time as multiple databases would create conflicts and / or missing |
| 20 |
information. That means at a system there is a primary package manager. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
The productive discussion is distracted from by your attempts to hamper my |
| 23 |
argumentation by making unsupported accusations against my reasoning. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Paul |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Paul de Vrieze |
| 29 |
Gentoo Developer |
| 30 |
Mail: pauldv@g.o |
| 31 |
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net |
Archives