From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from lists.gentoo.org (pigeon.gentoo.org [208.92.234.80]) by finch.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 97D3B1381F3 for ; Fri, 9 Aug 2013 07:19:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2C73AE0BF7; Fri, 9 Aug 2013 07:19:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-oa0-f43.google.com (mail-oa0-f43.google.com [209.85.219.43]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 5E575E0B6E for ; Fri, 9 Aug 2013 07:19:39 +0000 (UTC) Received: by mail-oa0-f43.google.com with SMTP id i10so6553084oag.16 for ; Fri, 09 Aug 2013 00:19:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:date:from:to:subject:message-id:mail-followup-to:references :mime-version:content-type:content-disposition:in-reply-to :user-agent; bh=F0qC9akT6XUIgQdpZaQZEUOxqrIG/qPmuUdLZSKwiQI=; b=krbfmhbroMtHEYNfF/bEjBdXWxORZArbJ7kx9w8Tge8c749BlCMYP9U7Ob/QSA0vaI sCnM1IBfi1z+9N8DHxiXDSPttBTQZOBp3iJ3sj+qwlb+tupHsqLSgAcC5REIBGf9uvO+ QBd/pMhpTLMpPiM/flEVYa7tTXhNOdiOof2gApZ9LIp8BY0mchU+MRvbWVKt0WxSF00f 7E0p6rPxE+YX0wVcBeVg+S/i+iLP9DtJK5lJx4zxZlW0ScyOUv1g4sCHKDnmGQgLH1E3 PKocfvsz/mB1JEYOhjwjiJ2u70UnQEDHuSzkbxtl1URsJOifDFfTRZ3lpxKHWV8Peayk I39A== X-Received: by 10.60.45.65 with SMTP id k1mr7405844oem.48.1376032778482; Fri, 09 Aug 2013 00:19:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: from linux1 (cpe-76-187-91-128.tx.res.rr.com. [76.187.91.128]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id y1sm18104572oek.4.2013.08.09.00.19.35 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Fri, 09 Aug 2013 00:19:37 -0700 (PDT) Sender: William Hubbs Received: by linux1 (sSMTP sendmail emulation); Fri, 09 Aug 2013 02:19:34 -0500 Date: Fri, 9 Aug 2013 02:19:34 -0500 From: William Hubbs To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [typo] Re: Re: Multiple implementations shouldn't block Gentoo's progress. Message-ID: <20130809071934.GA11821@linux1> Mail-Followup-To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org References: <5203DEA5.30004@gentoo.org> <20130808204701.3b419e58@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <20130808211103.4069d7ff@TOMWIJ-GENTOO> <5204403D.8050209@gentoo.org> <52048088.8020400@gentoo.org> <20130809064224.GA8940@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk> <20130809065115.GB8940@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-dev@lists.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="mYCpIKhGyMATD0i+" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20130809065115.GB8940@rathaus.eclipse.co.uk> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Archives-Salt: 33cac4c7-4f5a-4179-a557-eb41f44bf687 X-Archives-Hash: a5534dd3be7d9923bb5815d735b9af5f --mYCpIKhGyMATD0i+ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Fri, Aug 09, 2013 at 07:51:15AM +0100, Steven J. Long wrote: > wrote: > > It would seem to make sense if the packages are unmasked conditionally > s/ conditionally// >=20 > > in the parent, or the linux profile, and then unmasked in the profiles > > that need them. Sorry if I'm misunderstanding. What needs to be masked though? Like I said in my message earlier in this thread, there is no need for any major acrobatics here. If you upgrade to gnome-3.8, you switch over to systemd. The gnome team is working on an upgrade guide, so let's leave that to them. :-) William --mYCpIKhGyMATD0i+ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" Content-Description: Digital signature -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.20 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAlIEmAYACgkQblQW9DDEZThuywCgs1+WuLP6Ql6qGClZIfXepjY7 9OkAnihPEaEpNoc/XCrKy1Oo3gHAKKd9 =JZZT -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --mYCpIKhGyMATD0i+--