On Thu, 2012-06-21 at 13:30 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > On Thu, 21 Jun 2012 07:11:27 -0500 > Homer Parker <hpar...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > On Thu, 2012-06-21 at 08:00 +0100, Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > > > In case you're not aware, the first time Gentoo did multilib, it was > > > done as a series of random changes to Portage that no-one really > > > thought through or understood. As you can see, that didn't work... > > > > No, but paved the way for other distros as they had nothing > > even close. I'm sure you remember back then. Don't be an ass. > > And what did Gentoo get out of it? > > What I remember is Gentoo putting in lots of work randomly changing > things until things worked, and ending up not knowing what most of > those changes were or why they were done. The end result is that > there's still a random smattering of multilib-related mess cluttering > up ebuild internals that doesn't actually do anything except cause > intermittent breakages. Doing experiments is great as a way of > understanding the problem, but it isn't how you deliver a solution. > That takes a lot more work, and someone has to be prepared to do it. >
The hell? Other distos where still thinking of how to implement
multilib and we had it. I know first hand as I trashed a system trying
out the latest-n-greatest.. And the next round fixed it. The -emul
packages from then on along with the multilib profiles have worked fine.
Again, quit being an ass. Oh, and what I remember is.. You didn't
contribute. There was kingtaco, lv, and kuglafang <sp?>. So you're clear
there, you didn't have a damn thing to do with it.
--
Homer Parker <hpar...@gentoo.org>
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
