On Mon, 12 Jun 2006 23:07:34 +0200 "Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
| On Monday 12 June 2006 22:58, Stephen Bennett wrote:
| > I would like to think that this proposal addresses most of the
| > concerns raised in the last thread -- it implies nothing about
| > support for any other package manager, and introduces nothing that
| > could cause problems for Portage users, while still allowing
| > alternative package managers to use the tree without needing
| > Portage installed.
| This seems to be more acceptable. The implicit unstated dependencies
| on Python are something that will also be interesting to find out
| (especially for packages building Python modules automagically).

I had a look at this. I didn't find anything that actually relied upon
python from system -- it seems that people are pretty good about
specifying python deps explictly.

-- 
Ciaran McCreesh
Mail            : ciaran dot mccreesh at blueyonder.co.uk


-- 
[email protected] mailing list

Reply via email to