I'm sorry. My idea now seems much worse (and it wouldn't be worth implementing it). Regards, and thanks for your time, Kalrish On Jan 6, 2014 8:11 AM, "Rashif Ray Rahman" <schiv@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 6 January 2014 09:26, Kalrish Bäakjen <kalrish.antrax@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Note, however, that the model I propose wouldn't introduce many changes. > > You say that, but you also say this: > > > There are also directories in /usr/lib that should be renamed. > > To me, that by itself implies 'many changes'. Forgive me if I > misunderstood the context, though. > > > Please note that outdated versions would NOT be held in official > > repositories. However, as official PKGBUILDs are in an SVN tree, an user > > could checkout the desired version and build it for himself/herself (if I > > have understood it correctly). > > There is more to it than that -- we'd have to keep full sources [1] > for every version we support. While that's not anything new for binary > distributions, it does affect our resources. However, I do support > innovations to prevent breakages. > > Whatever it is, I don't think Judd envisioned slotted installs when he > conceived Arch Linux. In fact, Arch was made to move away from such > complexities, but that's only my interpretation of its history and > purpose. > > Caveat: I used Gentoo before Arch, not for long but long enough, in 2006/7. > > [1] ftp://ftp.archlinux.org/sources > > > -- > GPG/PGP ID: C0711BF1 >
