1 |
On Wed, May 17, 2006 at 12:11:34PM +0100, Stephen Bennett wrote: |
2 |
> On Wed, 17 May 2006 12:14:37 +0200 |
3 |
> Paul de Vrieze <pauldv@g.o> wrote: |
4 |
> |
5 |
> > Using the normal profiles would also establish paludis as a possible |
6 |
> > replacement of portage as primary package manager. Refraining from |
7 |
> > doing so disqualifies paludis from becoming a replacement for |
8 |
> > portage. As the only point in adding a secondary package manager is |
9 |
> > the possible replacement of the current primary package manager, I |
10 |
> > see no point to make any paludis directed changes to the tree. |
11 |
> |
12 |
> Using the normal profiles isn't an option unless they're changed to |
13 |
> include virtual/portage in the system set instead of sys-apps/portage. |
14 |
> That's the key change we're interested in here -- that the system set |
15 |
> not pull in portage when paludis is being used instead. |
16 |
|
17 |
Override the virtuals via user side configuration (capabilities |
18 |
existant in portage) is one solution to that issue. |
19 |
~harring |