1 |
On Fri, 23 Dec 2005 14:43:59 -0500, Stephen P. Becker wrote: |
2 |
|
3 |
> Since nobody else has asked, I will. What is the point? What problem |
4 |
> are you trying to solve with this ebuild? As far as I can tell, there |
5 |
> is no point, other than trying to sound like you are doing something |
6 |
> important. |
7 |
|
8 |
Sigh...The point was to take 3, potentially 4, ebuilds and make 1. As for |
9 |
trying to sound anything, that is not true. Why not bring that up with |
10 |
Kris who has taken up this project. |
11 |
|
12 |
> |
13 |
> I can tell you that I would be disappointed if this replaces the current |
14 |
> ebuilds, because I really don't need to reinstall nvidia-settings and |
15 |
> nvidia-glx every time I build a new kernel. |
16 |
> |
17 |
|
18 |
That's why we are having this dialog. When I proposed doing a unified |
19 |
ebuild, the objective always was to get and encourage feedback. If you are |
20 |
happy keeping up with three ebuilds, then that is feedback we need to |
21 |
have. BTW, please post these comments to the bug report. |
22 |
|
23 |
> |
24 |
>> We hope you will find this approach a more streamlined and easy |
25 |
>> implementation for nVidia. |
26 |
> |
27 |
> I don't particularly see how it is easier. |
28 |
|
29 |
But many do. This mirrors the approach nvidia takes. |
30 |
|
31 |
> |
32 |
> |
33 |
>> Thanks for your participation and feedback. |
34 |
>> |
35 |
>> Peter Hyman on behalf of the nVidia devs. |
36 |
> |
37 |
> The nVidia devs? Is upstream pushing this? Why? What is the point? |
38 |
|
39 |
No, nVidia devs are Kris and the x11-driver group. |
40 |
> |
41 |
> -Steve |
42 |
|
43 |
BTW, I don't want to get into a multi-threaded debate about the |
44 |
merits or drawbacks to this in this forum. Bug reports or comments are |
45 |
encouraged since that way everyone involved will see it. I was just asked |
46 |
to post the invite. |
47 |
|
48 |
-- |
49 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |