On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 11:40:00PM +0100, Peter Hjalmarsson wrote:
mån 2010-03-08 klockan 19:13 +0200 skrev Mart Raudsepp:
Instead I think we should be improving eselect profile to support
multiple inheriting /etc/make.profile files in a user friendly fashion,
and in the end removing 249
On Sat, 2010-03-13 at 13:16 -0800, Brian Harring wrote:
On Mon, Mar 08, 2010 at 11:40:00PM +0100, Peter Hjalmarsson wrote:
mån 2010-03-08 klockan 19:13 +0200 skrev Mart Raudsepp:
Instead I think we should be improving eselect profile to support
multiple inheriting /etc/make.profile
On Sun, Mar 14, 2010 at 02:02:46AM +0200, Mart Raudsepp wrote:
On Sat, 2010-03-13 at 13:16 -0800, Brian Harring wrote:
While I agree in principle within mixins, no one here is discussing
the QA affect of it- right now we can do visibility scans of
combinations of gnome + amd64 + 2010
mån 2010-03-08 klockan 19:13 +0200 skrev Mart Raudsepp:
Instead I think we should be improving eselect profile to support
multiple inheriting /etc/make.profile files in a user friendly fashion,
and in the end removing 249 subprofiles, instead of adding 28+.
I vote for this one. A profile
Hehe,
http://dev.gentoo.org/~antarus/essays/mixin-profiles.txt
-rw-r--r-- 1 antarus users 2653 Jun 4 2006 mixin-profiles.txt
-A
On Mon, Mar 8, 2010 at 2:40 PM, Peter Hjalmarsson x...@rymdraket.net wrote:
mån 2010-03-08 klockan 19:13 +0200 skrev Mart Raudsepp:
Instead I think we should be
