Re: [gentoo-dev] Binary release of gentoo

[Spider <spider@gentoo.org>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 972 bytes --]

begin  quote
On Thu, 10 Apr 2003 14:57:11 -0400
Jon Portnoy <avenj@gentoo.org> wrote:


> Put buildpkg in FEATURES and you'll have binary packages just as good
> as RPMs built automatically every time you merge something.

not 100% really, since theres no automatic signing/hash of the packages
(rpm has this, good feature)
as well as some rebuild dependencies might not be resolved..

foo depends on gal, but gal removes the softlinks and forces
dependencies to rebuild or retain the old version..  such things should
ofc. be resolved (gal is a problemchild in general) but, we lack that
functionality.


Theres a few other "good" things about the rpm format, although it isn't
as flexible as our packages are ;)



But, my point was about distribution of this. how/wether it is a
good/bad and even doable thing


//Spider


-- 
begin  .signature
This is a .signature virus! Please copy me into your .signature!
See Microsoft KB Article Q265230 for more information.
end

[-- Attachment #2: Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 189 bytes --]