| 1 |
On Fri, 13 Jun 2008 15:52:30 +0530 |
| 2 |
"Nirbheek Chauhan" <nirbheek.chauhan@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
> >> Interesting to note, however, that Paludis doesn't accept inline |
| 4 |
> >> comments, and this behaviour predates PMS. |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > Paludis behaviour there matches Portage behaviour at the time it was |
| 7 |
> > written, except that instead of proceeding with garbage values, |
| 8 |
> > Paludis gives an error. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Well, then it should be updated to match current Portage behaviour. |
| 11 |
> PMS is not supposed to document "How portage worked at one point of |
| 12 |
> time" or "The intersection of the capabilities of Portage and |
| 13 |
> Paludis". It should follow the current portage's behaviour as closely |
| 14 |
> as possible. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Do you really want to make it impossible to install Gentoo using the |
| 17 |
most recent official release? Because that's what will happen if we do |
| 18 |
what you're suggesting... |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
-- |
| 21 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives