On 11/11/18 18:15, Duncan wrote [excerpted]: > Is there any interest at all in binpkgs, perhaps when improved, from the > other PMs? Or are they effectively dead now or not interested in binpkgs > even if the format were to be improved, or simply too hard to work with? > Because "it'd be nice" (aka MAY level) to have this formally standardized > to PMS... if there's any interest from the other PMs. > Binpkgs are an important part of catalyst/releng stage-building runs, as it allows portage to 'cache' a lot of the packages needed/used.
Binpkgs are also a popular component of a few downstream distro's based on Gentoo (thinking pentoo right now as an easy example). So we don't want to break existing users of this format without considering the ramifications for these scenarios, as you'll have some very grumpy devs...
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
