From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1E8z1t-0004nK-NL for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Sat, 27 Aug 2005 11:39:22 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j7RBb8aP006472; Sat, 27 Aug 2005 11:37:08 GMT Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [134.68.220.30]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j7RBYXNb026005 for ; Sat, 27 Aug 2005 11:34:33 GMT Received: from cpe-65-26-255-237.wi.res.rr.com ([65.26.255.237] helo=nightcrawler) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtpa (Exim 4.43) id 1E8yyk-00012N-Jr for gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Sat, 27 Aug 2005 11:36:06 +0000 Date: Sat, 27 Aug 2005 06:34:15 -0500 From: Brian Harring To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] proposed shift of files in the tree of non profiles files into seperate dir Message-ID: <20050827113415.GZ1701@nightcrawler> References: <20050827084225.GW1701@nightcrawler> <0GLGT3211E5W3.18901035628RD8F@gentoo.org> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="KLINyTCByxgMLuN/" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <0GLGT3211E5W3.18901035628RD8F@gentoo.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.8i X-Archives-Salt: 6daedb4b-3370-40b3-aa35-65bd23fd5006 X-Archives-Hash: 48b8b17e869d4720856d0fe6d5fe44f7 --KLINyTCByxgMLuN/ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Sat, Aug 27, 2005 at 01:17:50PM +0200, Kevin F. Quinn wrote: > On 27/8/2005 10:42:25, Brian Harring (ferringb@gentoo.org) wrote: > > Hola all. > >=20 > > Straight to the point, I'm proposing that the following files- > > arch.list > > categories > > use.desc > > use.local.desc > > package.mask > > updates > >=20 > > be moved out of the profiles directory in the tree >=20 > Not sure about package.mask. I thought that was part of the profile, > as different profiles might package.mask separately. I know I use it > in /etc/profile to postpone updates. Rough filtering stack- profiles/package.mask /etc/make.profile/package.mask (incremental through subprofiles) users package.mask, and users package.unmask Ordered it in that fashion to show that it's effectively repository=20 filtering, profile filtering, user filtering; if you view it as=20 seperate entities with filters stacked up (how the rewrite implements=20 it), package.mask being repository metadata becomes clear. Basically, think of it this way; what files/data *must* stay with a=20 repository? If I'm using (say) gentopia ebuilds, the p.mask they use=20 is specific to _their_ repository; my official gentoo repository=20 should not be p.mask'ing there stuff, it should only affect itself,=20 and any repository that is slaved to it (overlays, which aren't stand=20 alone). At least that's what I think :) ~harring --KLINyTCByxgMLuN/ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFDEE+3vdBxRoA3VU0RAsJnAJ9nLO6lrPn2Q2JgarFUT70A1RWm8wCfeffh 6kHsQgp92x7SJLLRA4iTdJw= =5K6E -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --KLINyTCByxgMLuN/-- -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list