Doug Goldstein wrote:
> we go through the effort to ALLOW users to build their own binary
> blobs but is it really necessary as part of our culture?
I don't think that question can be answered?
The way I see it either someone maintains those packages, or not.
I'd be sad to see them go, but am no
On Sun, Jan 20, 2013 at 10:45 PM, Peter Stuge wrote:
> Doug Goldstein wrote:
>> sys-firmware/ipxe, sys-firmware/seabios, sys-firmware/sgabios,
>> sys-firmware/vgabios
> ..
>> So basically, how important is it to keep supporting these separately
>> buildable blobs knowing that it might slow the rel
Doug Goldstein wrote:
> sys-firmware/ipxe, sys-firmware/seabios, sys-firmware/sgabios,
> sys-firmware/vgabios
..
> So basically, how important is it to keep supporting these separately
> buildable blobs knowing that it might slow the release of QEMU within
> our own tree.
Each of those sys-firmwar
How important are separately buildable binary blobs? Rather than speak
in terms of app/foo and app/bar, I'll just come out and say its
app-emulation/qemu. Due to the nature of the package it relies on
firmware blobs to emulate certain aspects of the system (e.g. BIOS).
I've been working on making e
