Re: [gentoo-dev] [ANN] Multiple version suffixes illegal in gentoo-x86

[Doug Goldstein <cardoe@gentoo.org>]

Fernando J. Pereda wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 03:49:44PM -0400, Doug Goldstein wrote:
>   
>> Stephen Bennett wrote:
>>     
>>> On Tue, 24 Apr 2007 15:16:38 -0400
>>> Doug Goldstein <cardoe@gentoo.org> wrote:
>>>
>>>   
>>>       
>>>> So apparently as little as 1 council member can make a decision and it
>>>> be binding unless appealed to the entire council at the next meeting.
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> There were three council members who happened to be around at the time,
>>> and those three agreed unanimously. That seems reasonable to me for an
>>> interim decision.
>>>   
>>>       
>> Is it that serious of an issue that it needed to be done as such and
>> could not wait for a regular council meeting?
>>
>> Granted I understand it's important for you paludis users since paludis
>> doesn't support that.
>>  But I'm talking about real Gentoo users that use Portage.
>>     
>
> You mean real Gentoo users that use a Portage version that don't support
> multiple suffixes, right ?
>   
Portage doesn't support it in very old versions. The ebuilds in question
are marked ~arch. Any one using ~arch with an old version of Portage
would have been forced to upgrade by the point of installing those
ebuilds. Also, Portage gracefully handles the situation by ignoring
those ebuilds.
> Oh... also... paludis supports it in trunk. Could you please stop the
> conspiracy theories ?
>
> - ferdy
>
>   
Like I previously stated, I apologize for not running the very latest
Paludis trunk. I only have actual releases available to me and those
releases, including the newest one do not support it.


-- 
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list