Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: [Thu Oct 13 2005, 01:37:32PM CDT] > Problem is that this would mean replace it with another GLEP then.... > because it changes basically everything.
I would rather it be replaced by another GLEP, personally. Just yanking it isn't sufficient, since it doesn't solve the problem of what to call the profile for a freebsd-based system that uses a gnu userland on x86. Or is the claim that no such name would be needed? The original e-mail suggesting yanking the GLEP wasn't really sufficiently for me to understand exactly how the replacement would work. > Also because right now we're not following that scheme anyway right now... Which is fine, of course, since nothing is in the tree yet, but there will be real complaints if this stuff makes it into the tree w/o following that GLEP (or a new GLEP if it's approved). -g2boojum- -- Grant Goodyear Gentoo Developer [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0 9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76
pgpQ7YbK3rW2D.pgp
Description: PGP signature
