| 1 |
On Sat, 26 Jul 2014 15:11:36 +0000 (UTC) |
| 2 |
Martin Vaeth <martin@×××××.de> wrote: |
| 3 |
> Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccreesh@××××××××××.com> wrote: |
| 4 |
> > Martin Vaeth <martin@×××××.de> wrote: |
| 5 |
> > The problems are of a different kind. Static dependencies don't do |
| 6 |
> > something that you want them to do. Dynamic dependencies are |
| 7 |
> > outright broken. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> Please, stop your childish behaviour. |
| 10 |
> You prove nothing be repeating claims which had just been disproved. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Let's start with the easiest issue: please point us all to the place |
| 13 |
where you "proved" how dynamic dependencies still work in the face of |
| 14 |
ebuild removals. Your solution to this problem will be of great |
| 15 |
benefit to all of us. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
-- |
| 18 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives