1 |
begin quote |
2 |
On 01 Aug 2004 07:56:40 -0400 |
3 |
Ned Ludd <solar@g.o> wrote: |
4 |
|
5 |
|
6 |
> I was instructed by portage devs to inform you/gwn/users of the |
7 |
> proposed change. (give/take time to pan it out) |
8 |
> |
9 |
> Sweet this will indeed help you. We can for example take the case of |
10 |
> x86 on x86 we support x86:glibc x86:uclibc x86:obsd. That's 3 full |
11 |
> different USERLANDS all of which we can could in theory provide binary |
12 |
> packages under the same ARCH but for which all have unique CHOSTS. |
13 |
|
14 |
|
15 |
Whats needed is a simple upgrade path, along with time to notify our |
16 |
users. Neither is very hard to do as we can use symlinks for backwards |
17 |
compability. |
18 |
|
19 |
And the move should be simple, once portage dev's have decided on the |
20 |
finalized name for the new dir (worse if its binary package rename, but |
21 |
the "rename" command can do marvels there. ) |
22 |
|
23 |
|
24 |
|
25 |
|
26 |
//Spider |
27 |
|
28 |
|
29 |
-- |
30 |
begin .signature |
31 |
Tortured users / Laughing in pain |
32 |
See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information. |
33 |
end |