| 1 |
On Tue, 13 Mar 2012 01:54:30 +0200, Nikos Chantziaras wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> >> Anyone care to offer an opinion on what it will take to get PROVIDES |
| 4 |
> >> support in portage? |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > IMO, it would take virtuals causing so many headachy breakages that |
| 7 |
> > some devs started keeping up a steady drumbeat on irc and mailing |
| 8 |
> > lists. When the number of virtual packages gets close to a thousand, |
| 9 |
> > I'd guess that might happen. Then there would be years of discussion |
| 10 |
> > and GLEP proposals, and by EAPI 207 it should be done. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> The problem isn't the amount of virtuals. This doesn't affect the |
| 13 |
> users much. It's the inability for people to offer replacement |
| 14 |
> packages in overlays. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
They could include a modified virtual in the overlay, but your point is |
| 17 |
valid; including the information in the ebuilds is more flexible. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
-- |
| 21 |
Neil Bothwick |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright |
| 24 |
until you hear them speak. |
Archives