From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 22015 invoked by uid 1002); 21 May 2003 11:49:26 -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 29881 invoked from network); 21 May 2003 11:49:26 -0000 From: Stephan Hermann Reply-To: sh@kde-coder.de To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Date: Wed, 21 May 2003 13:55:24 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.5.1 References: <200305201635.57663.sh@kde-coder.de> <200305210535.05426.sh@kde-coder.de> <200305211120.22970.pauldv@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <200305211120.22970.pauldv@gentoo.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200305211355.24647.sh@kde-coder.de> Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] installing portage in another directory structure X-Archives-Salt: 5e44c8a9-fe64-49ed-abbd-656fd4dfb567 X-Archives-Hash: b794b28b05d4411853830c89f49b4a5c Hi, On Wednesday 21 May 2003 11:20, Paul de Vrieze wrote: > Thanks for the clarification. I think that portage itself should be as > location independent as possible ( one fixed location will be necessary to > tell portage where to find the rest, but this location could be specified > optionally by an environment variable). Allthough I'm not responsible for > portage I encourage you to submit any patches to the extend of making > portage even more location independent. Well, I'm working on it, and if I have this running, I will provide patches via gentoozilla ,). But first, I must learn a bit of snake language ;) regards, \sh -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list