Archives
Archives
| From: | Brian Harring <ferringb@g.o> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] portage and porthole | ||
| Date: | Fri, 11 Nov 2005 02:52:32 | ||
| Message-Id: | 20051111025155.GB9806@nightcrawler | ||
| In Reply to: | [gentoo-portage-dev] portage and porthole by Brian |
||
| 1 | On Thu, Nov 10, 2005 at 06:42:54PM -0800, Brian wrote: |
| 2 | > Just a quick question. With all the changes I see in this list. Is |
| 3 | > there anything coming (that you know of) that will break porthole's use |
| 4 | > of portage. |
| 5 | Long term? I'm unfortunately looking at breaking pretty much all api |
| 6 | access portage wise, for 3.0. |
| 7 | |
| 8 | Short term? Unless you're doing questionable stuff like bypassing the |
| 9 | cache layer and accessing the files on disk... nope, shouldn't hork |
| 10 | anything. |
| 11 | |
| 12 | ~harring |
| Subject | Author |
|---|---|
| Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] portage and porthole | Brian <dol-sen@×××××.net> |