Steve Long wrote: [Fri Nov 03 2006, 02:47:52AM CST]
> I appreciate that many will be against this idea, but I'd still like to 
> discuss it: a binary repository for gentoo.
> 
> Yes, I know gentoo is a meta-distro. And that there isn't loads of
> bandwidth.  That's easily got round. 

It is?

> The main problem I see is USE flags (devs already 
> compile with standard C-flags right?) but I was thinking about standardising 
> for 2 or 3 types of network- SOHO, medium and large enterprise (eg for LDAP 
> etc) would solve most cases. We can always tag pkgs with USE flags.
> 
> If gentoo is still serious about enterprise adoption, it needs a binary repo 
> (so we can avoid system breakage) which would of course be a little bit 
> behind. I'd be happy to contribute time, as I'm sure many other users would.

I think you'll find that there is little interest (among devs) in Gentoo
maintaining a binary sub-distribution.  My view, and for some time it's 
been our semi-official view, is that Gentoo can serve as a nice base for
creating a binary distribution, and we encourage people to do so, but
that it shouldn't be a part of Gentoo itself.

(That said, it's true that there is still a real need for better support
for binaries in portage, especially for handling USE conflicts.)

As for Gentoo being serious about enterprise adoption, I don't agree
that we need a binary repo.  I think we ought to make it easy for our
users to create and use their own, customized, distribution.  That's our
strength as a meta-distribution.  (We also need to make it easy to
install and replicate custom distributions, but we already have Catalyst
and the Seeds project addressing those issues.)

-g2boojum-
-- 
Grant Goodyear  
Gentoo Developer
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.gentoo.org/~g2boojum
GPG Fingerprint: D706 9802 1663 DEF5 81B0  9573 A6DC 7152 E0F6 5B76

Attachment: pgpNHFBr0M82S.pgp
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to