Hey, Ed W wrote: >> I wouldn't have mentioned an IP lawyer at all had it not been for the >> fact that I know that you are in the US. :) > > I'm in the UK
Ha! Awesome. :) Sorry, must have mixed you up then! >> I use catalyst, and I control what gets deployed with custom ebuilds >> and snapshots. The fewer packages in the final system the better; >> less stuff to track. > > Whilst I guess it should be possible to tear apart catalyst and find out > how they do it, does anyone happen to know or have a heads up on the code > for catalyst? The catalyst code has no part in this, but it takes a portage snapshot as one of it's inputs, and if you maintain a custom snapshot (with only packages you need) then you know what gets used. > It must be a solved problem so I should think others have solved > this in various ways? I'm not sure it is a solved problem. If you want a different solution than basically maintaining your own portage snapshot then the easiest way to track patches is (third time now) to add bookkeeping in the epatch function. //Peter
