| 1 |
Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
| 2 |
> Honestly, I don't see portage ever being able to really |
| 3 |
> support anything like this so long as the tree continues to change. |
| 4 |
> It simply doesn't seem to be compatible with how Gentoo development is |
| 5 |
> done. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
and Chris Gianelloni wrote: |
| 8 |
|
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Yup. It's called /etc/portage and we've had it for a while. You simply |
| 11 |
> seem to be missing its flexibility. |
| 12 |
<snip> |
| 13 |
> Yep. It was such a good idea that the portage team implemented it quite |
| 14 |
> some time ago. *grin* |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
Which is it, Chris? |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Impossible that portage will ever be able to really support anything |
| 20 |
like this... |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
or... |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
already done and I (along with Jean-Francois and Michael Schilling) am |
| 25 |
just too stupid to see it? |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Make up your mind... |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
For all the credit that I give to the Gentoo developers, you are one |
| 30 |
from whom I would withdraw it. You are merely a polarity responder and |
| 31 |
as such, not worth engaging any further. You would do Gentoo a service |
| 32 |
by keeping your mouth shut in response to posts like mine (and many |
| 33 |
others I'm sure). If I were not so self-assured, you would simply drive |
| 34 |
me away from Gentoo with such ugly remarks, and I've no doubt that you |
| 35 |
have driven away many others who are less self-assured. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
You're in my kill file now, so don't waste your time and the bandwidth |
| 38 |
by responding. All mailing lists have a topic and attempting to |
| 39 |
ridicule other people is not on-topic in any of them... certainly not |
| 40 |
here. It just facilitates making you look like a jerk which you need no |
| 41 |
assistance with. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
-Kevin |
| 44 |
-- |
| 45 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives