2008/5/30 David Leverton <levertond@googlemail.com>:

> On Friday 30 May 2008 22:10:00 Hemmann, Volker Armin wrote:
> > On Freitag, 30. Mai 2008, David Leverton wrote:
> > oh really?
> >
> > I don't think so.
>
> You also "think" that
> * it's Paludis's fault that the maintainers of some of the overlays I use
> chose to commit eclasses with the same names as those in the tree
> * package.mask syntax, that I explicitly stated was supported by Portage
> when
> I first mentioned it, is invalid
>

is portage would admit commiting of changes to its eclasses that would be
avoided. if someone needs a big eclass like the kde4-base for example, but
would need to change a little thing in it what should he do?! this
overriding is good and is done in much places in programming and also in
this case should not be a bother since would just be read for the specific
overlay that ovverrides it. but if portage is so dumb to not be able to
understand that maybe portage mantainers should do it. portage also has the
faculty of mantaining overlays and thus this behavior should be normal.

-- 
dott. ing. beso