From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19028 invoked by uid 1002); 5 Dec 2003 22:34:55 -0600 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-portage-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail Reply-To: gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 27484 invoked from network); 5 Dec 2003 22:34:55 -0600 From: rd To: gentoo-portage-dev In-Reply-To: <200312050942.05159.pauldv@gentoo.org> References: <1070594948.24977.10.camel@gen2rd.web> <200312050942.05159.pauldv@gentoo.org> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1070685208.5124.10.camel@gen2rd.web> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2003 22:33:28 -0600 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Portage-ng / Lost ebuilds? X-Archives-Salt: 349f97d2-947a-43c3-abba-f7bfc8f146fe X-Archives-Hash: e0440dd8457b84cda1e1fa56706cb0f8 Paul -- That would be great! As 'gentoo rocks', it is suitable for production servers. It is my personal server. I only apply security fixes on an ongoing basis. Then quarterly I update my world. Regression testing is a bitch, so I do not want to firefight those issues more than a few times each year. -rdg On Fri, 2003-12-05 at 02:42, Paul de Vrieze wrote: > On Friday 05 December 2003 04:29, rd wrote: > > Referring to the following below, is portage-ng going to address this > > very serious issue as related to applying JUST security updates to > > "stable" production gentoo boxes? > > > > This is an issue that will hopefully be addressed in the future, but it has > little to do with portage. We will look at providing releases that we will > only provide security fixes on. > > Paul -- Never underestimate the bandwidth of a station wagon full of tapes! -- gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list