Re: [gentoo-dev] not missing feature for package.unmask

["Kurt V. Hindenburg" <khindenburg@cherrynebula.net>]

On Wednesday 11 June 2003 7:31 am, Christian Aust wrote:
| "Kurt V. Hindenburg" <khindenburg@cherrynebula.net> wrote on Tue,
| 10 Jun 2003 19:02:39
|
| -0500:
| > On Tuesday 10 June 2003 3:21 am, Stanislav Brabec wrote:
| > | V Po, 09. 06. 2003 v 22:56, Christian Aust napsal:
| > | > I'm not sure if gentoo actually lacks this feature, but how
| > | > can I permanently accept ebuilds that are marked unstable,
| > |
| > | It does not lack, probably only does not document it:
| > |
| > | mkdir -p /etc/portage
| > | echo "sys-devel/gcc" >>/etc/portage/package.unmask
| >
| > Doesn't work here... or did you mean something else?
| >
| > % cat /etc/portage/package.unmask
| > app-crypt/cryptplug
| >
| > % emerge -Up $(qpkg -I -nc)
| >
| > >>> --upgradeonly implies --update... adding --update to options.
| >
| > These are the packages that I would merge, in order:
| >
| > Calculating dependencies /
| > !!! all ebuilds that could satisfy "app-crypt/cryptplug" have
| > been masked.
| >
| > !!! Error calculating dependencies. Please correct.

A search of /usr/lib/python2.2/site-packages/portage.py shows :

pkgmasklines=grabfile(settings["PORTDIR"]+"/profiles/package.mask")
pkgmasklines+=grabfile("/etc/portage/profiles/package.mask")

pkgunmasklines=grabfile("/etc/portage/package.unmask");

The code below shows unmaskdict being populated.  It seems that emerge 
doesn't take it into account... dunno...

-- 

 Kurt
---
  There is no good and evil; there is only power.


--
gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list