On Saturday 22 of December 2007 10:50:40 Jan Kundrát wrote:
> Piotr Jaroszyński wrote:
> > The package manger would have to look for ebuilds in the main
> > dir and all the subdirs in case it doesn't have/can't use the cache.
>
> No, it would have to check only for subdirectories named after known
On Sat, Dec 22, 2007 at 07:09:30AM +, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 03:41:02 +0200
> Petteri Räty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Piotr Jaroszyński kirjoitti:
> > > This GLEP proposes usage of EAPI-suffixed file extensions for
> > > ebuilds (for example, foo-1.2.3.ebuild-1).
> >
Piotr Jaroszyński wrote:
> The package manger would have to look for ebuilds in the main
> dir and all the subdirs in case it doesn't have/can't use the cache.
No, it would have to check only for subdirectories named after known and
supported EAPIs.
Cheers,
-jkt
--
cd /local/pub && more beer >
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 03:41:02 +0200
Petteri Räty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Piotr Jaroszyński kirjoitti:
> > This GLEP proposes usage of EAPI-suffixed file extensions for
> > ebuilds (for example, foo-1.2.3.ebuild-1).
>
> It seems many people don't like the idea of having it in the filename
> but
On Saturday 22 of December 2007 02:41:02 Petteri Räty wrote:
> Piotr Jaroszyński kirjoitti:
> > This GLEP proposes usage of EAPI-suffixed file extensions for ebuilds
> > (for example, foo-1.2.3.ebuild-1).
>
> It seems many people don't like the idea of having it in the filename
Seems you are count
Piotr Jaroszyński kirjoitti:
> This GLEP proposes usage of EAPI-suffixed file extensions for ebuilds (for
> example, foo-1.2.3.ebuild-1).
It seems many people don't like the idea of having it in the filename
but how about having subdirectories for different eapis. This should
even be faster for th
