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 1Fh6QQ-0000pC-QO for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 19 May 2006 14:57:59 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.6) with SMTP id k4JEv0gg028600; Fri, 19 May 2006 14:57:00 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k4JEr7xJ023818 for ; Fri, 19 May 2006 14:53:08 GMT Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id F03806436D for ; Fri, 19 May 2006 14:53:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 00667-09 for ; Fri, 19 May 2006 14:53:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: from iglu.bnet.local (d071043.adsl.hansenet.de [80.171.71.43]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E7F51642FD for ; Fri, 19 May 2006 14:53:04 +0000 (UTC) From: Carsten Lohrke To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Paludis and Profiles Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 16:52:53 +0200 User-Agent: KMail/1.9.1 References: <20060516161549.442b4d8a@localhost> <200605191555.03201.carlo@gentoo.org> <200605191517.54369.uberlord@gentoo.org> In-Reply-To: <200605191517.54369.uberlord@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: multipart/signed; boundary="nextPart12907683.e20zg2H063"; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; micalg=pgp-sha1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <200605191653.01131.carlo@gentoo.org> X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Status: No, score=5.284 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=-5.621, BAYES_00=-2.599, FORGED_RCVD_HELO=0.135, RCVD_IN_DSBL=2.6, RCVD_IN_NJABL_DUL=1.946, RCVD_IN_NJABL_PROXY=0.721, RCVD_IN_SORBS_DUL=2.046, RCVD_IN_SORBS_SOCKS=2.159, RCVD_IN_XBL=3.897] X-Spam-Score: 5.284 X-Spam-Level: ***** X-Archives-Salt: 5b2293c1-7529-4660-b421-8d20eb2f15c1 X-Archives-Hash: 7409ab7ae99aa64069d5f322ff98eca3 --nextPart12907683.e20zg2H063 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-15" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline On Friday 19 May 2006 16:17, Roy Marples wrote: > I can show you bugs where existing packages have invalid init scripts that > just don't work with any baselayout version in portage. You could argue=20 > that they shouldn't be in the tree - if so then our imap server is > foo-bared as it uses courier-imap. I suggest you check out bug #98745 for= a > clear definition of "support". Bugs exist and should be fixed, but this is by no means an argument. > I can also show you Gentoo scripts used by ifplugd and netplug with init-= ng > support in the tree right now. I guess that means that init-ng has some > level of support right? There will be always someone who goes ahead. Fact is that every dev who=20 maintains a package installing an init script is expecteted to do so for=20 baselayout, but is free to say no, when someone requests an initng one, as= =20 long as it isn't the Gentoo default. Carsten --nextPart12907683.e20zg2H063 Content-Type: application/pgp-signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.3-ecc0.1.6 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQBEbdvNVwbzmvGLSW8RAo0lAKCa7Ex1H7DAha+miA1E5CUzbJj6RgCfaW8n Q7mud90f1NbUA+2Me16exk8= =BQSn -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --nextPart12907683.e20zg2H063-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list