----- Forwarded message from Lance Lassetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> -----

Date: Sun, 13 Feb 2005 19:10:12 -0600
From: Lance Lassetter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: [gentoo-server] Gentoo security announcement web tool

this seems really simple enough, or am i overlooking something.

/me is very newbie.

regards,

lance(stuNNed)

On Sun, Feb 13, 2005 at 02:17:00AM +1030, stephen white wrote:
> On 11/02/2005, at 4:09 AM, Wendall Cada wrote:
> >Possibly for packages that one intentionally wants to push outside of
> >the stable tree. Something similar to package.keywords, only not moving
> >to unmasked or ARCH, but rather just to current package marked stable 
> >in
> >the main tree.
> 
> After thinking about this for some time, I think the biggest problem is 
> coming from:
> 
>       KEYWORDS="~x86"
> 
> since it is combining version control with architecture specification. 
> If it were possible to have something like:
> 
>       KEYWORDS="+x86"
> 
> where the "+" was defined as the baseline that the user has marked 
> stable (eg, a script run against the current portage), then that would 
> achieve most of the objectives nicely.
> 
> So my thoughts are generally drifting around this area, and a quick 
> hack to test the theory. :)
> 
> --
>   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> 
> CRICOS Provider Number 00123M
> ------------------------------------------------
> This email message is intended only for the addressee(s)
> and contains information that may be confidential and/or
> copyright.  If you are not the intended recipient please
> notify the sender by reply email and immediately delete
> this email. Use, disclosure or reproduction of this email
> by anyone other than the intended recipient(s) is strictly
> prohibited. No representation is made that this email or
> any attachments are free of viruses. Virus scanning is
> recommended and is the responsibility of the recipient.



----- End forwarded message -----

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Digital signature

Reply via email to