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 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1FgK1L-0004uK-Dz for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 17 May 2006 11:16:52 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.6) with SMTP id k4HBCelI027517; Wed, 17 May 2006 11:12:40 GMT Received: from ppsw-0.csi.cam.ac.uk (ppsw-0.csi.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.130]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k4HB4bt2030356 for ; Wed, 17 May 2006 11:04:37 GMT X-Cam-SpamDetails: Not scanned X-Cam-AntiVirus: No virus found X-Cam-ScannerInfo: http://www.cam.ac.uk/cs/email/scanner/ Received: from spb42.christs.cam.ac.uk ([131.111.233.172]:27326 helo=localhost) by ppsw-0.csi.cam.ac.uk (smtp.hermes.cam.ac.uk [131.111.8.150]:25) with esmtpsa (LOGIN:spb42) (TLSv1:DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA:256) id 1FgJpL-0003Ga-1K (Exim 4.54) for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org (return-path ); Wed, 17 May 2006 12:04:27 +0100 Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 12:11:34 +0100 From: Stephen Bennett To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Paludis and Profiles Message-ID: <20060517121134.532bbd13@localhost> In-Reply-To: <200605171214.38540.pauldv@gentoo.org> References: <20060516161549.442b4d8a@localhost> <20060517014253.15e92d29@localhost> <200605171214.38540.pauldv@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.0.0-rc4 (GTK+ 2.8.12; i686-pc-linux-gnu) 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=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: "S.P. Bennett" X-Archives-Salt: 9800ddee-eff8-4fa8-9df7-f056cb727875 X-Archives-Hash: 013375fbcdde2838519e3f0b8bd8de77 On Wed, 17 May 2006 12:14:37 +0200 Paul de Vrieze wrote: > Using the normal profiles would also establish paludis as a possible > replacement of portage as primary package manager. Refraining from > doing so disqualifies paludis from becoming a replacement for > portage. As the only point in adding a secondary package manager is > the possible replacement of the current primary package manager, I > see no point to make any paludis directed changes to the tree. Using the normal profiles isn't an option unless they're changed to include virtual/portage in the system set instead of sys-apps/portage. That's the key change we're interested in here -- that the system set not pull in portage when paludis is being used instead. -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list