From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1J3Zuu-0001vR-Cd for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 15 Dec 2007 16:31:08 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.2/8.14.0) with SMTP id lBFGUnbY020763; Sat, 15 Dec 2007 16:30:49 GMT Received: from heisenberg.zen.co.uk (heisenberg.zen.co.uk [212.23.3.141]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.14.2/8.14.0) with ESMTP id lBFGUn6V020758 for ; Sat, 15 Dec 2007 16:30:49 GMT Received: from [62.3.120.141] (helo=spike) by heisenberg.zen.co.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1J3Zub-0005Wl-EX for gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org; Sat, 15 Dec 2007 16:30:49 +0000 Date: Sat, 15 Dec 2007 16:30:48 +0000 From: Roy Bamford Subject: Re: [gentoo-project] PMS To: gentoo-project@lists.gentoo.org In-Reply-To: (from slong@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk on Sat Dec 15 06:46:32 2007) X-Mailer: Balsa 2.3.20 Message-Id: <1197736248l.20970l.1l@spike> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Project discussion list X-BeenThere: gentoo-project@gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Originating-Heisenberg-IP: [62.3.120.141] X-Archives-Salt: 44234a42-534f-4d10-9cac-e0eaa3f3de2e X-Archives-Hash: 1df85729f246fb66c113803bd0c5f551 On 2007.12.15 06:46, Steve Long wrote: > Just a quick post re something that was raised in the council=20 > meeting. >=20 Steve, The offical package manager is portage. If another package manager does=20 something different to portage - even if it fixes a bug in portage, by=20 definition, its not compliant. The exisiting PMS have been arrived at by documenting what portage=20 does, which is itself a moving target. No PMS is likely to be endorsed until Portage stays still long enough=20 to document it, check it and ratifiy it, unless some arbitary portage=20 version is chosen to document. Any such PMS won't be very useful, as portage will have moved on=20 meanwhile. A PMS will only be useful when its adopted and maintained by=20 the portage devs, when portage will become a reference inplementaion of=20 the spec. I don't see that happening, since they don't need such a=20 document.=20 It reminds me of AMD, Cyrix and others trying to produce a x86 CPU=20 clone. Most got close but not close enough as they failed to reproduce=20 the bugs in the silicon that were in some cases needed for normal=20 operation. AMD persisted and got a reasonable market share. Intel=20 didn't make it easy, releasing new CPUs from time to time. At least developers wanting a PMS can read the portage source code to=20 see what it does. Regards, Roy Bamford (NeddySeagoon) -- gentoo-project@gentoo.org mailing list