Re: [gentoo-dev] Overriding package mask

[Rigo <rigo@home.nl>]

Op zo 18-08-2002, om 08:57 schreef Jonathan Kelly:
> On 18 Aug 2002 16:31:21 +1000
> Troy Dack <troy@tkdack.com> wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, 2002-08-18 at 14:04, Jonathan Kelly wrote:
> > > I beg to differ ... I did this with media-gfx/povray and after every
> > > "emerge sync" I get ....
> > > # emerge -pu povray
> > 
> > My apologies, I thought that the local ebuilds were NOT checked against
> > packages.mask.
> > 
> > I've just tried the same thing as you, with the same results.
> > 
> > It would make sense (to me anyway) if the local ebuilds in
> > $PORTDIR_OVERLAY were *NOT* checked against packages.mask, that way us
> > end users could assist the developers by simply dropping masked ebuilds
> > into our local tree and then testing them.  Sure it means that there is
> > duplication and some extra hard drive space taken up, but ebuilds aren't
> > that big.  Also for those wishing to test ebuilds it would be a
> > conscious decision to place a masked ebuild in your local tree.
> 
> I think that is a logical and great idea.

Wouldn't it also be nice if settings in
$PORTDIR_OVERLAY/profiles/package.mask overrule settings in 
$PORTDIR/profiles/package.mask ? This way directories could stay in
$PORTDIR and you don't have to keep worrying about changin' package.mask
time & time again.

Ex: 

lappy # diff /usr/portage/profiles/package.mask
/root/package.mask.2|grep povray

< #=media-gfx/povray-3.50a
> =media-gfx/povray-3.50a


Just a thought,

Rigo

> 
> Cheers.
> Jonathan Kelly.
> _______________________________________________
> gentoo-dev mailing list
> gentoo-dev@gentoo.org
> http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev