From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LhPBs-0003VP-JL for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 11 Mar 2009 14:13:48 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id AC0D4E00CE; Wed, 11 Mar 2009 14:13:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-ew0-f173.google.com (mail-ew0-f173.google.com [209.85.219.173]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 42708E00CE for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2009 14:13:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ewy21 with SMTP id 21so17486ewy.34 for ; Wed, 11 Mar 2009 07:13:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:date:from:to:subject :message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer:mime-version :content-type; bh=ZGZcGau5kLSVXxzZ+ge7ycQup519DLy13K2fMWJ0FpU=; b=eJgPS504DqX/cth0iWImEIshbvYLWWpuoqKnautLnSTHPHbOepUJLnFsdDEqribcVK vkQhbPv9tZJN2NlHOnGaKc//CupNP51+C5HYR/P6QgLRUaxIC3GB6mUkKAG8v/XunQGl UrZyq96qxTaj1M/IA96kZg7DmIcgbGezDw9zU= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=googlemail.com; s=gamma; h=date:from:to:subject:message-id:in-reply-to:references:x-mailer :mime-version:content-type; b=qhOSVrQ2CmaRsMLlMS5uSCvoa3saz/Tdhi31NvNYCwA0xpWRzyDX8l5p0qu9jSepi2 6WCFT1RN2AGoTHKtetEOSMXwWp15BrHsK9o24FAwe9Z5PeFY2Wcbw86XBEPq93wQXRrF +B5W+GPT9hSwBa7p/pWW2wRLwDrL1hYJB0F04= Received: by 10.216.39.85 with SMTP id c63mr3434490web.103.1236780818344; Wed, 11 Mar 2009 07:13:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from snowcone (92-235-187-79.cable.ubr18.sgyl.blueyonder.co.uk [92.235.187.79]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 7sm11952214nfv.25.2009.03.11.07.13.37 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Wed, 11 Mar 2009 07:13:37 -0700 (PDT) Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 14:13:27 +0000 From: Ciaran McCreesh To: gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-council] Re: Comparison of GLEP 54 and 'live ebuild' proposal Message-ID: <20090311141327.11cc865d@snowcone> In-Reply-To: <49B78AA8.4000101@gentoo.org> References: <20090310234231.3e664575@halo.dirtyepic.sk.ca> <49B78AA8.4000101@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.1 (GTK+ 2.14.7; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-council@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="Sig_/PCNN1TuWg3gMos7Tje+2Gxh"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=PGP-SHA1 X-Archives-Salt: f5c34ea9-d88f-491b-816b-fb63bab3198f X-Archives-Hash: 0a70bbca908938c6a01b37cb592f6b26 --Sig_/PCNN1TuWg3gMos7Tje+2Gxh Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Wed, 11 Mar 2009 10:55:52 +0100 Luca Barbato wrote: > The ebuild itself has some embedded information so portage > could/should provide something like. >=20 > [ebuild U ] sys-devel/gcc-4.4.0_pre20090310 [from svn master > r12345] That claim right there is enough to show that you haven't thought about this at all. Your proposal is lots of handwaving magic, most of it unimplementable. I suggest you put together a reference implementation before promoting this idea any further. --=20 Ciaran McCreesh --Sig_/PCNN1TuWg3gMos7Tje+2Gxh Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkm3xw0ACgkQ96zL6DUtXhGJ5ACeJYoQidavYYFoRlc44BFB5EQc 1yIAn3ist+l6N/3bD/yVJUzv8Sxloof3 =s3Oe -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/PCNN1TuWg3gMos7Tje+2Gxh--