| 1 |
On Wed, 17 May 2006 13:40:18 +0200 |
| 2 |
Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Is there a problem about both of them being there? |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
You can't use both on the same ROOT. The VDB format is subtly different. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
> I don't see a problem in changing the profiles to include |
| 9 |
> virtual/portage though where portage is the default provider. It is a |
| 10 |
> change unrelated to paludis, and would allow easier development of |
| 11 |
> any alternative package manager. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
This could be a viable alternative if the paludis profile is shown to |
| 14 |
be a no-go. A seperate profile would make things easier from a |
| 15 |
bug-wrangling point of view, since it would be easier to determine when |
| 16 |
a bug may be caused by using paludis. |
| 17 |
-- |
| 18 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives