| 1 |
On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 23:07:34 +0200 "Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò" |
| 2 |
<flameeyes@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
| On Monday 12 June 2006 22:58, Stephen Bennett wrote: |
| 4 |
| > I would like to think that this proposal addresses most of the |
| 5 |
| > concerns raised in the last thread -- it implies nothing about |
| 6 |
| > support for any other package manager, and introduces nothing that |
| 7 |
| > could cause problems for Portage users, while still allowing |
| 8 |
| > alternative package managers to use the tree without needing |
| 9 |
| > Portage installed. |
| 10 |
| This seems to be more acceptable. The implicit unstated dependencies |
| 11 |
| on Python are something that will also be interesting to find out |
| 12 |
| (especially for packages building Python modules automagically). |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
I had a look at this. I didn't find anything that actually relied upon |
| 15 |
python from system -- it seems that people are pretty good about |
| 16 |
specifying python deps explictly. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
-- |
| 19 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
| 20 |
Mail : ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives