From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 14382 invoked by uid 1002); 10 Apr 2003 08:29:14 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 27231 invoked from network); 10 Apr 2003 08:29:13 -0000 Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2003 04:29:11 -0400 From: Jon Portnoy To: Cedric Veilleux Cc: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Message-ID: <20030410082911.GA23008@cerberus.oppresses.us> References: <200304100013.30307.gentoo@mchsi.com> <20030410062826.GA2310@mars.leahcim.invalid> <200304100003.57256.robert.cole@support4linux.com> <200304100429.01001.cedric@neopeak.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <200304100429.01001.cedric@neopeak.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.4i Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Binary release of gentoo X-Archives-Salt: 616c1273-6e3f-40a2-bb65-ea073cfc3f0d X-Archives-Hash: 699cbd884a1b408a448c32999c130b58 On Thu, Apr 10, 2003 at 04:29:00AM -0400, Cedric Veilleux wrote: > > > I thought it was called Debian? ;o) > > > > > > Or perhaps, "I'd eat meat, if only it were vegetarian" > > > > > > Seriously though, I don't see the point, unless you want to sell more > > > T-Shirts, there are a plethora of good binary distributions of linux out > > > there already and all the downsides you list are what, imo, define > > > Gentoo. > > > > > > I'd prefer to see gentoo improved as a source-based distribution > > > > Ditto. There is no point to a binary version of Gentoo. If you want that > > then as Michael said just use Debian. > > > I don't agree. Gentoo already supports binary packages anyways (emerge -b / > emerge -k). We're only talking about improving it AFAIK.. What's wrong with > improving some features of portage if it's possible and if it won't hurt > anyone? > It's not a question of improving it so much as the distribution resources required. I'm not sure you understand the full extent of the problems with distributing binary packaging. The short story is: Besides loss of flexibility, it's a QA nightmare. It also requires a massive infrastructure behind it in terms of putting binary packages online for people to download. We don't have space on our mirrors, we're not very likely to host something like that - the resources just aren't there, frankly, and it doesn't seem very productive for us to dedicate those resources to binary distribution when we're a source-based distribution... If someone wanted to do something like this independently, I think that would be an excellent resource to a lot of people. However, you need to consider the full implications - it's not as simple as it seems on the surface... -- Jon Portnoy avenj/irc.freenode.net -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list