Re: [gentoo-dev] devleopment sources are no longer 'development' - example

[Mike Williams <mike@gaima.co.uk>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Wednesday 25 August 2004 21:00, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> Well, it's pretty nasty... Part of the idea of SLOTs is that we never
> need to include version numbers in packages... In fact our docs [1] even
>
> say:
> > Most distributions and ports systems tend to have a "freetype" package
> > for freetype 1.x and "freetype2" for 2.x. We consider this approach a
> > sign of a fundamentally broken package management system.
>
> Do we really want to admit that our package manager is broken?

It is nasty, yes, but I wouldn't go so far as to say it's broken, rather a 
documented limitation has been met.
The 2 paragraphs following your quote states areas for improvement.

| Sometimes Portage forces users to upgrade their applications to the most 
recent version even if the version they have installed is in a different 
slot. Moreover, for those who write ebuilds it is not possible to express the 
dependency on a specific slot of a package. 

> [1]: http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/portage-manual.xml

- -- 
Mike Williams
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFBLPONInuLMrk7bIwRAjlIAJ98WVvNhWqztrLQtZwOnXYDzNO3WgCdH0Eb
EzdT1leLuMfy4AWPzSxRB6I=
=I6Iz
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list