Ryan Hill wrote:
Robert Buchholz wrote:
I don't want to sound negative and I like the idea a lot, but two things
are on my mind about this:
It should also sync with changes in the tree, like package removals,
additions and package moves.
For sure.
When you're talking about it on
Ryan Hill wrote:
Steve Long wrote:
Robert Buchholz wrote:
Since the tree itself is the best database of the packages available,
anything else would be a lot more overhead.
I really don't agree, altho I could well be missing something. Surely there
should be a maintenance/QA database which
Robert Buchholz wrote:
I don't want to sound negative and I like the idea a lot, but two things
are on my mind about this:
It should also sync with changes in the tree, like package removals,
additions and package moves.
For sure.
When you're talking about it on ebuild base: When a
Steve Long wrote:
Robert Buchholz wrote:
I understand that it's hard to distinguish a pkg that hasn't been checked,
but might need the C-compiler, from a pkg that doesn't need the compiler
but just hasn't been checked. That's where I was going with the database
stuff.
Since the tree itself
