From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from skinny.southernlinux.net (ns2.rednecks.net [64.192.52.5]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j41DJ2R3005482 for ; Sun, 1 May 2005 13:19:04 GMT Received: (qmail 21496 invoked by uid 210); 1 May 2005 09:18:15 -0400 Received: from 10.10.10.188 by skinny (envelope-from , uid 201) with qmail-scanner-1.25st (clamdscan: 0.82/861. f-prot: 4.4.2/3.14.11. spamassassin: 3.0.2. perlscan: 1.25st. Clear:RC:1(10.10.10.188):. Processed in 0.062279 secs); 01 May 2005 13:18:15 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO ?10.10.10.188?) (10.10.10.188) by 0 with RC4-MD5 encrypted SMTP; 1 May 2005 09:18:15 -0400 Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Cutting down on non-cascaded profiles From: Ned Ludd To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: References: <4274ACD1.9020003@gentoo.org> <4274B10C.5060507@longlandclan.hopto.org> Content-Type: text/plain Date: Sun, 01 May 2005 09:15:21 -0400 Message-Id: <1114953321.14147.12.camel@localhost> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Evolution 2.0.4 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 78303cf6-d10e-4d85-81a5-19fd42581b1f X-Archives-Hash: f328a06164e4fac793d9d33207885aca On Sun, 2005-05-01 at 05:31 -0700, Duncan wrote: > Stuart Longland posted <4274B10C.5060507@longlandclan.hopto.org>, > excerpted below, on Sun, 01 May 2005 20:35:56 +1000: > > > Donnie Berkholz wrote: > >> How long are all those non-cascaded profiles going to stick around? They > >> make profile changes a mess for anyone who wants to do something crazy > >> like change default USE flags for everyone. (Who would ever need to do > >> that?!?!) > > > > I was just thinking this myself. > Are there any users still using Gentoo > > Linux 1.4 or 2004.0? Yes sorta 1.4. I still have production servers in place that were based on the Gentoo-1.2/4 era. The smooth migration path away from 1.4 profiles correlates to having a proper default-linux/$ARCH/gcc2 profile. So far it looks as if only x86 has made this move while every other arch appears to be letting the <=1.4 profiles rot. -- Ned Ludd -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list