On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 17:32 -0600, Lance Albertson wrote:
snip a bunch about binpkg
I think a key thing that is missing is build info that is only kept on
the installed system. If we were to ever create a build server setup, we
need to be able to have multiple binpkg's of the same version
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 17:32 -0600, Lance Albertson wrote:
snip a bunch about binpkg
I think a key thing that is missing is build info that is only kept on
the installed system. If we were to ever create a build server setup, we
need to be able to have multiple binpkg's
On Sun, Jan 08, 2006 at 10:55:50AM -0600, Lance Albertson wrote:
A few rough ideas that just popped in my
head is either packing all of these versions into one tarball (not even
sure if thats feasible)
Ugly, binpkgs are bzip2ed tarballs + xpak at the end of the bzip2
stream, jamming multiple
Chris Bainbridge posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
excerpted below, on Fri, 06 Jan 2006 09:00:59 +:
The problems being:
1) Manpower. There are already 10,000 open bugs in bugzilla (and
growing) without adding more.
2) Lack of interest. Most developers aren't interested in supporting
old
On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 02:36 -0700, Duncan wrote:
OTOH, it's entirely possible a Gentoo /based/ enterprise distribution may
emerge at some point. IMO, however, there's enough conflict with what
makes Gentoo great at what it does today, that such efforts should be
separate from Gentoo itself.
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 02:36 -0700, Duncan wrote:
OTOH, it's entirely possible a Gentoo /based/ enterprise distribution may
emerge at some point. IMO, however, there's enough conflict with what
makes Gentoo great at what it does today, that such efforts should be
On Friday 06 January 2006 16:27, Lance Albertson wrote:
As seen from the discussion earlier this week, I don't think Gentoo has
the proper open-mindness to create a proper enterprise distro.
This has nothing to with open-mindness, but having enough people doing the
general maintenance of a
Lance Albertson wrote: [Fri Jan 06 2006, 09:27:23AM CST]
As seen from the discussion earlier this week, I don't think Gentoo has
the proper open-mindness to create a proper enterprise distro. There are
too many things that would get in the way of Gentoo proper to make it
work right. I agree
Grant Goodyear wrote: [Fri Jan 06 2006, 10:46:55AM CST]
Addressing your point about Enterprise Gentoo, I think you're probably
right about it needing focus, direction, and a leader, but that's quite
different from needing Gentoo as a whole to have any of those. The
Gentoo *BSD work is a good
On Fri, Jan 06, 2006 at 09:27:23AM -0600, Lance Albertson wrote:
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 02:36 -0700, Duncan wrote:
OTOH, it's entirely possible a Gentoo /based/ enterprise distribution may
emerge at some point. IMO, however, there's enough conflict with what
makes
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Lance Albertson wrote:
| As seen from the discussion earlier this week, I don't think Gentoo has
| the proper open-mindness to create a proper enterprise distro. There are
| too many things that would get in the way of Gentoo proper to make it
| work
On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 09:27 -0600, Lance Albertson wrote:
Chris Gianelloni wrote:
On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 02:36 -0700, Duncan wrote:
OTOH, it's entirely possible a Gentoo /based/ enterprise distribution may
emerge at some point. IMO, however, there's enough conflict with what
makes Gentoo
On Fri, 2006-01-06 at 17:19 +0100, Carsten Lohrke wrote:
On Friday 06 January 2006 16:27, Lance Albertson wrote:
As seen from the discussion earlier this week, I don't think Gentoo has
the proper open-mindness to create a proper enterprise distro.
This has nothing to with open-mindness,
Duncan wrote:
Chris Gianelloni posted [EMAIL PROTECTED],
excerpted below, on Fri, 06 Jan 2006 14:30:28 -0500:
Perhaps a good explanation of the binpkg format would be in order to
give us a chance to determine what could/should be changed?
As I regularly use the binpkg features on
14 matches
Mail list logo
