1 |
On Friday 05 December 2003 03:10 pm, Brett Simpson wrote: |
2 |
> On Friday 05 December 2003 02:51 pm, Lisa Seelye wrote: |
3 |
> > On Fri, 2003-12-05 at 14:38, Brett Simpson wrote: |
4 |
> > > Since this was based off of Gentoo 1.0 how relevant is this for the |
5 |
> > > current 1.4 release in a production server environment? |
6 |
> > |
7 |
> > Gentoo is flexible enough to be placed in just about any type of |
8 |
> > environment. As we move closer and closer to Portage-ng the |
9 |
> > administrator of a production server will only gain more control over |
10 |
> > the Gentoo machines he or she maintains. |
11 |
> > |
12 |
> > With the control over the dependency tree and portage tree that Gentoo |
13 |
> > affords its users there is no good reason to not consider Gentoo for any |
14 |
> > type of machine - production or otherwise. |
15 |
|
16 |
More management questions: |
17 |
|
18 |
So would I be correct in saying that the "bleeding edge" portion in Gentoo 1.0 |
19 |
is now equivalent to the unstable packages in Gentoo 1.4? |
20 |
|
21 |
And that someone who installs Gentoo by default won't get an unstable/untested |
22 |
bleeding edge package unless they configure the system to install unstable |
23 |
packages? |
24 |
|
25 |
Thanks, |
26 |
Brett |
27 |
|
28 |
|
29 |
-- |
30 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |