Gentoo Archives: gentoo-project

From: Alec Warner <antarus@g.o>
To: Steve Long <slong@××××××××××××××××××.uk>
Cc: gentoo-project@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] Re: Gentoo <--> Sabayon Relation
Date: Sun, 05 Aug 2007 20:38:50
Message-Id: b41005390708051338l6f349ef5l8cf2612e9eabe501@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: [gentoo-project] Re: Gentoo <--> Sabayon Relation by Steve Long
1 On 8/4/07, Steve Long <slong@××××××××××××××××××.uk> wrote:
2 > Alec Warner wrote:
3 >
4 > > So to sum up, we don't support it because it has really bad make.conf
5 > > settings (CFLAGS/LDFLAGS). It would be like saying 'we support you
6 > > using -ffast-math'. Which is false, we will tell you to rebuild your
7 > > system without -ffast-math. If you come to me with a sabayon problem,
8 > > I'll tell you to rebuild your system with sane build flags unless you
9 > > have good evidence that those flags are not the problem. Most Sabayon
10 > > users are not prepared to do that.
11 > >
12 >
13 > I don't understand why he didn't just do a binary distro; that's what gentoo
14 > is setup to make (as a meta-distro.) The only reason I can think of is lack
15 > of resources, and that's one of the reasons I think of it as leeching,
16 > since gentoo infra is used to supply portage and distfiles. The other thing
17 > is, there probably wasn't such good support for overlays when he started
18 > (I'm guessing.) Nowadays, there are loads of em, and many herds have their
19 > own overlays.
20
21 I would say because our binary repository format currently isn't
22 exactly...what I'd call good. The code has improved a lot and I
23 recall solar working on new stuff for distribution, I am unsure if it
24 has reached stable.
25 --
26 gentoo-project@g.o mailing list