On Thu, 2016-03-31 at 02:26 +1300, Kent Fredric wrote: > On 31 March 2016 at 01:49, Joakim Tjernlund > <joakim.tjernl...@infinera.com> wrote: > > > > > > I am missing something? > > Generally I think that everything possible to do under /etc/portage should > > be > > doable under a profile as well. > > So after you ignore my other stuff: Profiles are part of the PMS > specification, so any changes that go in there have to be EAPI > scheduled and cried over for a bit, and probably GLEPs and stuff also. > > I guess portage could informally support it prior to any such > specification materialising, but it would have to be forbidden in the > main tree until such a specification was defined, or the portage tree > would become PMS in-compatible.
Yes, exactly! There is no need to use non PMS compatible features in the gentoo tree. Jocke
