-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On Sunday 07 December 2003 04:08 pm, Tom Wesley wrote:
> I think that there is a high degree of probability that
> portage-ng(-ng(-ng)) ;) will include some form of tree selection. I
> personally would like to see something like this. Either pointing to a
> completely different rsync server set, or having a extended set of
> architecture definitions. I prefer the latter, as in x86-server,
> ~x86-server, x86-desktop, x86-testing and the like. Security updates
> would of course need to penetrate all types here. Maybe ~x86 and x86
> simply isn't enough of a split between what is stable and what isn't
> anymore, especially because enterprise server people are looking at
> Gentoo.
This handles different versions and where each one is progressing, I just hope
they start realizing they can't delete and ebuild just because they are 2-3
versions past it or the like. I got caught on that with wget. I upgraded,
later that week, I decided to do a emerge -e, and it broke because the wget
version I had was gone..
Never did figure out why they deleted the damn thing.
- --
Give a man a fish and you feed him for a day;
teach him to use the Net and he won't bother you for weeks.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux)
iD8DBQE/07Mkld4MRA3gEwYRAj4xAJ4zUBypaR1n+oWlAE+CiKOgJ1fgEgCeOI2D
MxT+WE/l2CctpI2Gv6fTe1c=
=OO7r
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
