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 1FgOm2-0001Hv-Tz for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 17 May 2006 16:21:23 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.6) with SMTP id k4HGISbJ028845; Wed, 17 May 2006 16:18:28 GMT Received: from smtp-out2.blueyonder.co.uk (smtp-out2.blueyonder.co.uk [195.188.213.5]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k4HG5g2x020183 for ; Wed, 17 May 2006 16:05:42 GMT Received: from [172.23.170.146] (helo=anti-virus03-09) by smtp-out2.blueyonder.co.uk with smtp (Exim 4.52) id 1FgOWs-0001ZG-7X for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Wed, 17 May 2006 17:05:42 +0100 Received: from [213.121.151.206] (helo=snowdrop.home) by asmtp-out6.blueyonder.co.uk with esmtpa (Exim 4.52) id 1FgOWr-0002cn-2V for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Wed, 17 May 2006 17:05:41 +0100 Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 17:05:19 +0100 From: Ciaran McCreesh To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Paludis and Profiles Message-ID: <20060517170519.2655830e@snowdrop.home> In-Reply-To: <200605171748.33259.pauldv@gentoo.org> References: <20060516161549.442b4d8a@localhost> <200605171711.10418.pauldv@gentoo.org> <20060517162628.45ef827a@snowdrop.home> <200605171748.33259.pauldv@gentoo.org> X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.1.1 (GTK+ 2.8.17; 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 X-Archives-Salt: 2a475b96-6c63-46c9-9fef-a3aea29e513c X-Archives-Hash: fd80d548b379b5bb5a8436c6025387db On Wed, 17 May 2006 17:48:32 +0200 Paul de Vrieze wrote: | This is basically to protect the official package manager. This is | not because I like portage that much, but to provide some kind of | unified direction. I am afraid that allowing various competing | package managers would cause a wildfire of incompatible elements in | the tree. Therefore there must be one official package manager that | the tree works with. You're saying "we must never move forward" here. There is no requirement that users use packages that are EAPI masked, any more than there is a requirement that users use packages that are package masked. We have had situations in the past where some ebuilds have relied upon a non-stable or hard-masked Portage version. | > The same situation will occur when newer Portage versions supporting | > newer EAPIs are released into p.mask or ~arch. Some packages will | > end up relying upon something that isn't the stable package manager. | | Portage is however the official package manager. This means that | these packages do not hamper the position of the official package | manager. The "official package manager" isn't something that's in package.mask. -- Ciaran McCreesh Mail : ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list