From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1E0SVQ-0006q6-9b for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 03 Aug 2005 23:18:36 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j73NHJfK015160; Wed, 3 Aug 2005 23:17:19 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j73NFeVm015416 for ; Wed, 3 Aug 2005 23:15:41 GMT Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=home.wh0rd.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1E0ST9-0001rn-Ik for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Wed, 03 Aug 2005 23:16:15 +0000 Received: (qmail 26454 invoked from network); 3 Aug 2005 20:14:48 -0400 Received: from unknown (HELO vapier) (192.168.0.2) by 192.168.0.1 with SMTP; 3 Aug 2005 20:14:48 -0400 From: Mike Frysinger Organization: wh0rd.org To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Valid Profiles Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2005 19:16:17 -0400 User-Agent: KMail/1.8.2 References: <4E015C1C-884E-4522-A6BF-60E9555D008D@gentoo.org> <1122905726.16102.1.camel@cgianelloni.nuvox.net> <200508011022.43297.vapier@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <200508011022.43297.vapier@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200508031916.17420.vapier@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 38512a1f-e254-4223-9075-69d4b1686eeb X-Archives-Hash: 59cd735f781266dbb3ec29a2b28affea On Monday 01 August 2005 10:22 am, Mike Frysinger wrote: > On Monday 01 August 2005 10:15 am, Chris Gianelloni wrote: > > On Sun, 2005-07-31 at 10:59 -0400, Ned Ludd wrote: > > > - x86/linux24 (deprecated) > > > - x86/linux26 (deprecated) > > > > What should we do with deprecated profiles? Should we still be checking > > against them? > > > > I would think we would, but what do the rest of you think? > > speaking of which, i had an idea to clean up all that crap, i just forgot > to post it a while back ... > > gentoo-x86/profiles/ $ tree obsolete > obsolete > > then we can punt all the flat profiles and if a user needs an upgrade path, > they can symlink to these in the meantime well, no one has said anything about this so i'll go ahead and punt all remaining flat profiles and add this obsolete tree once 2005.1 is released in other words, these people will be served: default-alpha-1.4 default-alpha-2004.0 default-macos-10.3 default-macos-10.4 default-ppc default-ppc-1.0 default-ppc-1.4 default-ppc-2004.0 default-ppc-2004.1 default-ppc-2004.2 default-ppc-2004.3 default-ppc64-2004.2 default-ppc64-2004.3 default-sparc-1.4 default-sparc-2004.0 default-sparc64-1.4 default-sparc64-2004.0 default-x86-2004.2 default-x86-obsd-2004 gcc33-sparc64-1.4 hardened-x86-2004.0 -mike -mike -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list