On Fri, 13 Oct 2006 13:53:27 +0200 Simon Stelling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Paul de Vrieze wrote: > > I would go for the EAPI bump. Even then I think it would be smart > > to wait a short while for packages to use this as we ensure that > > the supporting portage version is stable. > > Err, EAPI was designed to assure that a supporting version is > actually used, no need to wait then. Although obviously nothing using such an EAPI version could go stable until a supporting version of portage goes stable on all relevant arches (I think of EAPI as an implicit BDEPEND on the package manager version). -- Kevin F. Quinn
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature