| 1 |
On Wed, 2006-05-17 at 21:22 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, 17 May 2006 16:12:09 -0400 Daniel Ostrow <dostrow@g.o> |
| 3 |
> wrote: |
| 4 |
> | Unfortunately in this case there is only one cat, he has only one skin |
| 5 |
> | and there is only one knife with which to skin him. Chris asked if |
| 6 |
> | paludis can build a release (meaning an official Gentoo release), |
| 7 |
> | which means following the Release Guidelines to the letter. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> If you look at it that way (which isn't what he actually asked to begin |
| 10 |
> with), then the question is "is Paludis identical to Portage?", which |
| 11 |
> it clearly isn't. A more useful question is "can Paludis give the same |
| 12 |
> end result as Portage?". |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
It can not. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Paludis, by your own admission, can not and will not build |
| 17 |
portage-compatible binary packages. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
This is a simple binary equation. Can paludis provide a |
| 20 |
portage-compatible binary package? No. This means it does not give the |
| 21 |
same end result. Period. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
-- |
| 24 |
Chris Gianelloni |
| 25 |
Release Engineering - Strategic Lead |
| 26 |
x86 Architecture Team |
| 27 |
Games - Developer |
| 28 |
Gentoo Linux |
Archives