On Sat, 2005-01-22 at 11:35 +0300, Peter wrote: > On Fri, 21 Jan 2005 20:54:03 +0000, Daniel Drake wrote: > > So, you are correct in saying that Gentoo can't include this right now > > on our supported kernels. But it is not to say that it "never" will be > > supported. > > Well. I can't see the future :) But in the current situation, > I have to look for workarounds like, mentioned by you, installation from > package cd and then patching kernel. And I do not see any steps > forward. So I told never. Of course may be one day... > > But may be there is a possibility to create ebuild, which will download > the patch from http://www.polbox.com/h/hs001/ , and then patch the kernel? > I think this ebuild can be GPL'ed, but then user can decide does he want > this bad kernel headers and other code be changed or not. > > What is the gentoo position concerning ebuild for packages with > proprietary license? Is there any possibility to have such ebuild in > portage? > well im not entirely sure what you mean by that but portage already has some things you need a license for, aka vmware, decent3, fakk, and im sure there are alot of other things in there, they just put them in portage so they install nice and dont mess anything up, you just need your licence key to finish the emerge, and it makes sure all the files go into the right places. dont know if this is what you were talking about or not, if not please disregard.
> Of course such solution does not solve problems with live-cd but it can > improve gentoo's package system: the user can know nothing about pathing, > but has everything necessary installed. I think that is the reason for > package system to exist. > > ________ > Peter. > > -- [email protected] mailing list
