Gentoo Archives: gentoo-server

From: Michael Boman <mboman@g.o>
To: gentoo-server@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-server] QA or an unchanging portage tree?
Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2004 16:38:21
Message-Id: 1075912942.16646.5.camel@hacklab.homelinux.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-server] QA or an unchanging portage tree? by Jonathan Fors
1 On Wed, 2004-02-04 at 05:38, Jonathan Fors wrote:
2 > Kurt Lieber wrote:
3 >
4 > > * guaranteed minimum life of all ebuilds in the tree
5 > >
6 > >
7 > That is not as critical to _me_ than it can be for folks in critical
8 > enterprise environments, but of course, they do most certainly need it.
9 > I am not to decide whether this should be added to portage or not.
10
11 This could be quite easily solved (on a local/server level) by just
12 removing the --delete and --delete-after options for rsync in emerge. It
13 will use more disk space, but I would rate that as an acceptable
14 trade-off..
15
16 And if the server-gentoo is coming with a portage snapshot anyway it
17 will contain all they ever need.
18
19 My $0.02
20
21 --
22 Michael Boman
23 Developer, Hardened Gentoo Linux
24 http://www.gentoo.org http://dev.gentoo.org/~mboman

Attachments

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