Gentoo Archives: gentoo-portage-dev

From: John Nilsson <john@×××××××.nu>
To: gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Current portage well designed, but badly used
Date: Sun, 28 Nov 2004 06:16:08
Message-Id: 1101622687.13829.2.camel@newkid.milsson.nu
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Current portage well designed, but badly used by Ed Grimm
1 On sön, 2004-11-28 at 05:44 +0000, Ed Grimm wrote:
2 > There may be others which are more problematic. I haven't seen Gentoo
3 > using them, but many kernels are distributed with -[a-z][a-z]\d+
4 > versions, which indicate which alternate maintainer managed the
5 > additional patches beyond the standard kernel version - which is newer,
6 > -mm5 or -bk15? The world may never know. (It's only determinate for
7 > specific kernel versions, and frequently it's an apples and lemonade
8 > comparison, as they don't address the same issues.)
9
10 Would it be to much overhead if the ebuilds just linked to previous
11 versions instead? Like the ineed stuff of the init scripts. This way no
12 no version parsing at all would be needed.
13
14 -John

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Current portage well designed, but badly used Allen Parker <infowolfe@×××××.com>