| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On Thursday 12 August 2004 14:29, Marius Mauch wrote: |
| 5 |
> On 08/12/04 Carsten Lohrke wrote: |
| 6 |
> > http://bugs.gentoo.org/enter_bug.cgi?product=Portage%20Development |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> No, eclasses do *not* belong to portage. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Um, and what else? I always thought |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
#Core - Ebuild Support dev-portage@g.o |
| 13 |
#Bugs and enhancements relating to tools and functions that aid the |
| 14 |
#development and execution of ebuilds. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
would include base.eclass, eutils.eclass, .... |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
On the other hand it is always a good idea to let someone else (bug-wranglers) |
| 19 |
decide. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Carsten |
| 23 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 24 |
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
iD8DBQFBG2nyVwbzmvGLSW8RAuVqAKCwmj8hM+U6oURmWiwadABjXxtcgwCfRlie |
| 27 |
pQImMiL9ULzrDCUPiXANGXA= |
| 28 |
=7dhd |
| 29 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
-- |
| 32 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives