On (19/12/07 20:05) b.n. wrote: > Dirk Heinrichs ha scritto: > > On Wednesday 19 December 2007 17:43:41 Grant wrote: > > > >> Has anyone here switched from Portage to Paludis? > > > > Yes, I did it long time ago :-) > > I'd like to try Paludis, looks very promising. > I think I've read that Portage and Paludis can coexist happily. Can > someone confirm it? It would be useful for a transition. > > m. > -- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list > Hi,
Yes, they *can* coexist well, but i've some remarks. The config is rather different but concepts remain the same. The paludis vdb-entries have more info but are(were) compatible. Watch out for some scripts (perl-cleaner, claw-mail, etc.) in which the use of portage/emerge is embedded. Put 'paludis' as USE-flag. Have gone to paludis then went back to portage w/o major problems. No support for binary packages yet, some warning/downgrades from the tree. Now using mainly paludis. Please don't consider this 'anti-portage', but just as my choice. For me both are good, only paludis has more features (even now). HTH. Rumen
pgplMQNa8uCqx.pgp
Description: PGP signature
