On Sunday 05 April 2009 10:26:39 Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 4 Apr 2009 23:58:04 -0400 Mike Frysinger wrote:
> > get a *working* implementation first and *then* worry about specing
> > it. once you have something running with portage, the spec should
> > fall naturally out. previous multilib
On Sat, 4 Apr 2009 23:58:04 -0400
Mike Frysinger wrote:
> get a *working* implementation first and *then* worry about specing
> it. once you have something running with portage, the spec should
> fall naturally out. previous multilib methods attempted to spec
> things out without any real code an
On Sun, 05 Apr 2009 14:07:37 +0200
Thomas Sachau wrote:
> Tiziano Müller schrieb:
> >> With this, i would also like to see any
> >> changes that need an EAPI to get into EAPI-3.
> > No. Won't happen.
> >
>
> Can you also explain your statement?
EAPI-3 is closed for new features. We want it imp
Tiziano Müller schrieb:
> Am Sonntag, den 05.04.2009, 10:18 +0200 schrieb Thomas Sachau:
>> Mike Frysinger schrieb:
>>> On Saturday 04 April 2009 08:59:22 Thomas Sachau wrote:
i would like to hear about other opinions about real multilib support
within our tree and package managers. From
Am Sonntag, den 05.04.2009, 10:18 +0200 schrieb Thomas Sachau:
> Mike Frysinger schrieb:
> > On Saturday 04 April 2009 08:59:22 Thomas Sachau wrote:
> >> i would like to hear about other opinions about real multilib support
> >> within our tree and package managers. From what i know, there are main
On Sunday 05 April 2009 04:18:34 Thomas Sachau wrote:
> Mike Frysinger schrieb:
> > On Saturday 04 April 2009 08:59:22 Thomas Sachau wrote:
> >> i would like to hear about other opinions about real multilib support
> >> within our tree and package managers. From what i know, there are mainly
> >> 2
Mike Frysinger schrieb:
> On Saturday 04 April 2009 08:59:22 Thomas Sachau wrote:
>> i would like to hear about other opinions about real multilib support
>> within our tree and package managers. From what i know, there are mainly 2
>> different ideas:
>>
>> 1. Do the main stuff in the package mana
On Saturday 04 April 2009 08:59:22 Thomas Sachau wrote:
> i would like to hear about other opinions about real multilib support
> within our tree and package managers. From what i know, there are mainly 2
> different ideas:
>
> 1. Do the main stuff in the package manager (e.g. if the ARCH is amd64
"Santiago M. Mola" said:
> On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Thomas Sachau wrote:
> > Hi folks,
> >
> >
> > i would like to hear about other opinions about real multilib support
> > within our tree and package managers. From what i know, there are
> > mainly 2 different ideas:
>
> The proposals are
On Sat, Apr 4, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Thomas Sachau wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
>
> i would like to hear about other opinions about real multilib support within
> our tree and package
> managers. From what i know, there are mainly 2 different ideas:
The proposals are not exactly these.
1. Make package manag
Am Saturday 04 April 2009 14:59:22 schrieb Thomas Sachau:
> Hi folks,
>
>
> i would like to hear about other opinions about real multilib support
> within our tree and package managers. From what i know, there are mainly 2
> different ideas:
>
> 1. Do the main stuff in the package manager (e.g. if
11 matches
Mail list logo
