Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Few things, which imho would make portage better

[tvali <qtvali@gmail.com>]

2006/3/14, Brian <dol-sen@telus.net>:
> On Tue, 2006-14-03 at 16:33 +0200, tvali wrote:
> If I recall, (there has been lots of discussion about converting portage
> to use databases, just check the mail archives and forum) portage
> already has sqlite support, but is not yet used.  Sqlite is smaller and
> has less dependencies than mysql.

How to use sqlite support in portage?

> Also, many of the features you talked about are already implemented in
> porthole,  such as continuing after a failed package, filtering out
> warnings, important messages, etc..
>
> Check it out.

Is this ok:
!!! All ebuilds that could satisfy "porthole" have been masked.
Or is there any, which is not masked?

And -- if portage is meant as main engine and porthole as it's gui,
isnt it a bit fuzzy to add speed-ups to porthole instead of portage?
If it continues like that, it may end up with someone writing
command-line tool for controlling porthole :P I think that if
application has 2 layers, one for logic and another for GUI, then it's
maybe not the best way of coding to add such kind of features to GUI
part of package. I personally would definitely try to make portage
itself support indexing and other such stuff to keep things clean. Am
i wrong? Or is it in plans to make gentoo a GUI linux with very weak
command-line support?

I think that GUI code would be *clean* if it's just a GUI!

> --
> Brian <dol-sen@telus.net>
>
> --
> gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
>
>


--
tvali
(e-mail: "qtvali@gmail.com"; msn: "qtvali@gmail.com";
icq: "317-492-912")

Ühe eesti internetifirma lehel kohtasin tsitaati:
If you don't do it excellently, dont do it at all. Because if it's not
excellent, it won't be profitable or fun, and if you're not in
business for fun or profit, what the hell are you doing here?
Robert Townsend

-- 
gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list