2009-08-21 23:17:56 Ryan Hill napisał(a): > On Fri, 21 Aug 2009 16:25:35 +0200 > Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis <arfre...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > 2009-08-13 07:55:22 Ryan Hill napisał(a): > > > On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 19:46:56 +0100 > > > Ciaran McCreesh <ciaran.mccre...@googlemail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Wed, 12 Aug 2009 20:41:30 +0200 > > > > Tomáš Chvátal <scarab...@gentoo.org> wrote: > > > > > Also we should allow the stuff as directory thingus (portage already > > > > > handles it right). > > > > > > > > That's a seperate thing that needs EAPI control. You'll need to propose > > > > it for EAPI 4 if you want that. > > > > > > Why is that (seriously curious, not disagreeing)? Portage has supported > > > this > > > for quite a while now. Does the current PMS disallow it? > > > > Portage documentation has been properly fixed (and the fix will be released > > in next version) and this feature can now be used in 10.0 profiles. > > How does changing the portage documentation magically add this to the PMS?
PMS developers are unwilling to fix many bugs in PMS. -- Arfrever Frehtes Taifersar Arahesis
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
