Re: [sabayon] =?utf-8?q?=5BPatch_Nag=5D_Bug_346890_=E2=80=93_Please?= =?utf-8?q?=09update_to_latest_Pessulus_tree?=

Le lundi 15 janvier 2007, à 19:42, Federico Mena Quintero a écrit :
> El vie, 12-01-2007 a las 10:55 +0100, Alexander Larsson escribió:
> > On Thu, 2007-01-11 at 20:19 -0600, Federico Mena Quintero wrote:
> > > El mié, 10-01-2007 a las 21:55 +0530, Sayamindu Dasgupta escribió:
> > > 
> > > > Probably Sabayon should be using the system installation of Pessulus
> > > > for handling lockdown. I have attached a pretty trivial to
> > > > which does this. Of
> > > > course, this makes Sabayon depend on Pessulus, but I think that's OK.
> > > 
> > > Thanks!  I just commented on the bug.  I think Sabayon and Pessulus
> > > should live in the same source tree, and not be separate modules at all.
> > > But maybe there are good reasons for this; does anyone know?
> > 
> > Two separate developer teams wrote two separate modules separately.
> > Thats the history. Could it change? Thats up to the developers.
> CCing Vincent Untz and Rob Bradford.
> What do you think of merging Pessulus to live directly under the Sabayon
> source tree?  I think we'd be able to hack on them better that way.

We discussed about this with Alex in the past. The main reason that we
have two modules is that I know some people were using pessulus only and
really didn't need sabayon.

We can of course have sabayon depend on the system installation of
pessulus. Another solution could be to have the sabayon module provide
the two tools: sabayon with included pessulus, and standalone pessulus.

I don't care that much about the way we solve this, but it's quite
important, IMHO, that we keep a standalone pessulus.


Les gens heureux ne sont pas pressés.

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]