On Fri, 23 May 2008 08:58:05 +0300 "Alon Bar-Lev" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > You can use any of the config update tools. For Exherbo, we're using > > 'eselect config'. For Gentoo, carry on using etc-update, or > > dispatch-conf, or conf-update, or any of the zillion other options. > > OK... Although this is essential part of package manager, as you > cannot complete installation without making sure configuration files > are in place. I agree user may choose to use a different > implementation, but a simple tools should be provided.
Uh huh. There are lots of them. Take your pick. > > > no binary packages (quickpkg) > > > > Binaries we will be doing at some point. But they're not an > > essential feature for what we're doing. > > So how do you manage large network with paludis? > You compile from sources at every endpoint? > Say you have 1000 workstations with different applications installed > at large groups, do you expect network admin to compile each package > over and over on all workstations? No, I expect them to use system images. And just install every application everywhere, since disk space is cheap. > > > no phases for package developers (ebuild) > > Again, at some point, unless we decide that implementing them will > > stop developers from fixing their bad development habits. But > > again, they're not an essential feature nor even particularly > > useful. > > It is great you want to force quality, but I don't understand why you > keep mentioning that this stop developers from doing good job... As I > wrote you in ticket#580, you cannot do good job if you don't verify > the outcome of every phase. This does not mean you don't check the > outcome of the whole process. Uh, the correct thing to verify is the process as a whole. > > > Current configuration for users is to have portage and paludis in > > > parallel, completing missing functionality from portage tools. > > > > > > Uh... No particular need to have a Portage config anywhere... > > Yes I do, as I care about the quality of my ebuilds, I have to > continue use ebuild for checking the phases. But since users don't use ebuild, using ebuild to check anything has no impact upon quality. > And as I must continue use cross compile, I must continue use > crossdev. And I distribute binary packages from compiler to network, > so I need to use quickpkg. Then use them. > I thought I can move to paludis to prepare to easy Exherbo migration, > but I don't think I can do this. Why would it make migration any easier? You might as well install dselect for all the difference it would make... -- Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ paludis-user mailing list [email protected] http://lists.pioto.org/mailman/listinfo/paludis-user
