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 1FgRtV-0004GA-V2 for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 17 May 2006 19:41:18 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.6) with SMTP id k4HJXtfC017563; Wed, 17 May 2006 19:33:55 GMT Received: from psmtp01.wxs.nl (psmtp01-real.wxs.nl [195.121.247.14]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k4HJHpLZ008565 for ; Wed, 17 May 2006 19:17:51 GMT Received: from hex.local.devrieze.net (ip5457f303.direct-adsl.nl [84.87.243.3]) by psmtp01.wxs.nl (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id k4HJHoni020841 for ; Wed, 17 May 2006 21:17:51 +0200 From: Paul de Vrieze To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Paludis and Profiles Date: Wed, 17 May 2006 21:17:55 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 References: <20060516161549.442b4d8a@localhost> <200605171711.10418.pauldv@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: X-Face: #Lb+'V@sGJ;ptgo5}V"W+5OCoo{LZv;bh,s,`WKLi/J)ed1_$0;6X<=?utf-8?q?700LVV/=3BLqPhiDP=5E=0A=09=27f=5Dfnv?=@%6M8\'HR1t=aFx;ePfp{ZQoBe+e)JOQ8T5*(_;mHY+cltLGq<;@$Y,=?utf-8?q?O=5C=24=0A=09Tm=23G6M?=,g![Q62J{na*S9d;R[^8pc%u\aiLqU@`kJtYl"^6pxdW 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: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart1681579.VnaolxzjoL"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200605172117.55627.pauldv@gentoo.org> X-Archives-Salt: 510edb40-843b-48c5-a339-ad6a94379731 X-Archives-Hash: 00a5f32fd668f8e50b2393b8e605b69d --nextPart1681579.VnaolxzjoL Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Wednesday 17 May 2006 17:55, Duncan wrote: > Paul de Vrieze posted > 200605171711.10418.pauldv@gentoo.org, excerpted below, on Wed, 17 May > > 2006 17:11:04 +0200: > > Let's make clear why I put this in. Basically I am of the opinion that > > until a decision is made to make (in this case) paludis the primary > > package manager, all official packages should work with portage. Package > > masked packages are not considered official. > > Wasn't it stated that the mechanism paludis uses to hide ebuilds that > won't work in portage from portage is to mask them to it? > > IOW, this is already the way it is being handled. If masked packages > aren't official, and ebuilds that require features only in paludis are > masked as far as portage is concerned, then that checkbox can be checked > off. No, these packages are available to paludis, but not to portage. Basically= =20 making a case for the use of paludis. I don't think that the decision to=20 replace portage should be made in that way. Please note that what I say is not specific to paludis. Paludis is here jus= t a=20 name for any package management contender. Paul =2D-=20 Paul de Vrieze Gentoo Developer Mail: pauldv@gentoo.org Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net --nextPart1681579.VnaolxzjoL Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2-ecc0.1.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBEa3bjbKx5DBjWFdsRAkmkAJ4lYSSm6ZS/Py88EC58KErKrHNYUACfesGc 8OCj5i7xzMlkAtSFYZwYCjs= =e+vZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart1681579.VnaolxzjoL-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list