Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: "Bo Ørsted Andresen" <bo.andresen@××××.dk>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules
Date: Sun, 16 Dec 2007 11:56:29
Message-Id: 200712161250.30286.bo.andresen@zlin.dk
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules by Grant
1 On Saturday 15 December 2007 20:00:54 Grant wrote:
2 > > > The real blocker for features that I'd like Gentoo to support is
3 > > > Portage. There is only 1½ people working on it and changing anything in
4 > > > it is hard because Portage is a horrible mess. There's plenty of
5 > > > activity in the tree but new desired features cannot be used in the
6 > > > tree until Portage supports them. It also doesn't make matters better
7 > > > that over the years all sorts of weird hacks (that now have to be
8 > > > supported) have been added to the tree instead of waiting for proper
9 > > > solutions. Most people who are capable of helping to improve Portage
10 > > > just don't want to touch it.
11 > >
12 > > Would you say that portage is the main block in the way of Gentoo's
13 > > continued progress?
14 >
15 > Actually I guess that's pretty much exactly what you said. I didn't
16 > realize portage is where the problem lies. In fact, I thought we were
17 > all still proud of portage I'm going to think about this some.
18
19 It all depends on what kind of features you're interested in. The features I
20 happen to be interested in requires ebuild changes (which means that me using
21 another package manager doesn't help) *and* requires package manager support
22 before said ebuild changes can happen. Therefore for me Portage is a
23 blocker...
24
25 --
26 Bo Andresen

Attachments

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

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules Dale <dalek1967@×××××××××.net>
Re: [gentoo-user] Gentoo Rules Grant <emailgrant@×××××.com>