From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4841 invoked by uid 1002); 25 Jun 2003 14:33:39 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 29369 invoked from network); 25 Jun 2003 14:33:38 -0000 Date: Wed, 25 Jun 2003 15:14:46 +0000 From: rob holland To: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Message-ID: <255140000.1056554086@localhost> In-Reply-To: <20030625230844.41f8121f.stubear@bouyer.no-ip.org> References: <20030624005813.GA5061@cerberus.oppresses.us> <20030624031603.6ddf9456.xwred1@xwredwing.net> <20030624171810.GA11676@cerberus.oppresses.us> <20030624162733.26377e48.xwred1@xwredwing.net> <20030625003039.GB25581@cerberus.oppresses.us> <20030624212200.29afd907.xwred1@xwredwing.net> <20030625041956.GA27580@cerberus.oppresses.us> <20030624214904.4a08cefb.xwred1@xwredwing.net> <20030625045343.GA27897@cerberus.oppresses.us> <20030624221257.50aab7c5.xwred1@xwredwing.net> <20030625051527.GA28137@cerberus.oppresses.us> <62420000.1056535645@localhost> <20030625042245.6d729118.xwred1@xwredwing.net> <181950000.1056547091@localhost> <20030625230844.41f8121f.stubear@bouyer.no-ip.org> X-Mailer: Mulberry/3.0.3 (Linux/x86) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="==========679688336==========" Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Gentoo Weekly News Letter - "Where is Gentoo Linux 1.4" X-Archives-Salt: 3a16519c-0afa-4fcd-9e6b-c85f0c7bddb2 X-Archives-Hash: 95ab18db47b1f23def442d01ca75fdca --==========679688336========== Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Disposition: inline --On Wednesday, June 25, 2003 23:08:44 +0900 Stuart Bouyer=20 wrote: I perfectly understand the complaint you've just made. I don't think it was = clear from the previous emails, maybe its just me. > Not only will new versions of > ebuilds have been added to the portage tree, but there is a great chance > that ebuild for the version of the package that I'm happy using will no > longer be in portage tree. What I install using the 1.3 install CD today > will be very different from what I installed 3 months ago. Please don't confuse which install CD you used with which packages you have = installed. The two are completely unlrelated unless you have never updated=20 anything from the stage3 build of the CD. I'd like to reiterate that "releases" are only releases of the install CD,=20 not the system. > If I don't want to update to the new package - and there are many > reasons why I would not want to - then my only optinos are not to emerge > sync (and miss out on the update I do need) or to manually find the > ebuilds I want in the attic of the web cvs gateway. Yes and this is a pain. We have no way to fix this currently which is what=20 I meant to imply with my email, I obviously failed miserably, sorry about=20 that. Due to the strain on infrastructure we don't allow users to sync their=20 portage tree using CVS. I can't see a way round this until we have the=20 capacity to allow anonymous CVS access again. Even then it will mean a big=20 change in the way gentoo is developed (use of CVS tags and marking some=20 kind of "system release") and possibly changes to portage. Currently only the live/install CDs are "released" as such. -- robh@gentoo.org / robh:irc.freenode.net http://cvs.gentoo.org/~robh/robh@gentoo.org.asc --==========679688336========== Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.2 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQE++bxn1lw5L9kbRykRAsdnAJ9SR2H3QS7x2e2nYoEMjbXf1TGlYACePi6b Nc5mwHcQTdBCP7pbvaq3tvY= =kK91 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --==========679688336==========--