From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4290 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2004 15:42:45 +0000 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (156.56.111.197) by lists.gentoo.org with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 25 Aug 2004 15:42:45 +0000 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([156.56.111.196] helo=parrot.gentoo.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1BzzvB-00033D-7k for arch-gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Wed, 25 Aug 2004 15:42:45 +0000 Received: (qmail 4395 invoked by uid 89); 25 Aug 2004 15:42:44 +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 29753 invoked from network); 25 Aug 2004 15:42:44 +0000 Date: Wed, 25 Aug 2004 15:42:44 +0000 From: Cory Visi To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Message-ID: <20040825154244.GA20213@toucan.gentoo.org> References: <412A9AFD.2030609@gentoo.org> <412AAB54.2090702@ramshacklestudios.com> <412B17E7.1020201@gentoo.org> <1093353966.20299.18.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <1093353966.20299.18.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.6i Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] development-sources are not 'development' X-Archives-Salt: 42e64544-43c3-4058-b141-5c2498a302c6 X-Archives-Hash: 1aaa65598aa8c12ac08d5a72f51aae8a On Tue, Aug 24, 2004 at 09:26:06AM -0400, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > While I agree that we shouldn't make a linux26-sources, I think that > making a linux24-sources would not be a problem. The reason for this is > that the 2.4 version will always be a 2.4 version, whereas the 2.6 > versions, *are* what kernel.org considers to be "vanilla" sources. Why > don't we? This was kinda my reason for bringing up a Gentoo-wide switch > to 2.6 as the "default" kernels in the near (February) future. This is still using version numbers in package names. I do not think we should take this approach. Aside from modifying portage a little, I liked the "legacy-sources" approach the best. -Cory -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list