From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1N7U7t-00017H-VJ for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Mon, 09 Nov 2009 13:17:46 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 2D4EFE0A07; Mon, 9 Nov 2009 13:17:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (smtp.gentoo.org [140.211.166.183]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0CE03E0A07 for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2009 13:17:44 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 84C7C65C81 for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2009 13:17:43 +0000 (UTC) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at gentoo.org X-Spam-Score: -2.551 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 required=5.5 tests=[AWL=0.048, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from smtp.gentoo.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.gentoo.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id NISYxndC6yCO for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2009 13:17:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lo.gmane.org (lo.gmane.org [80.91.229.12]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E5DF767BC6 for ; Mon, 9 Nov 2009 13:17:35 +0000 (UTC) Received: from list by lo.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.50) id 1N7U7d-0007nu-RK for gentoo-dev@gentoo.org; Mon, 09 Nov 2009 14:17:29 +0100 Received: from ip68-231-21-207.ph.ph.cox.net ([68.231.21.207]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 09 Nov 2009 14:17:29 +0100 Received: from 1i5t5.duncan by ip68-231-21-207.ph.ph.cox.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 09 Nov 2009 14:17:29 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: gentoo-dev@lists.gentoo.org From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net> Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: QA: package.mask policies Date: Mon, 9 Nov 2009 13:17:03 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: References: <200911071824.16651.scarabeus@gentoo.org> <20091107180322.GA23301@linux1> <20091107193312.5df04226@gentoo.org> <20091108161322.19cf8845@gentoo.org> 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: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: ip68-231-21-207.ph.ph.cox.net User-Agent: Pan/0.133 (House of Butterflies) Sender: news Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Archives-Salt: 11595b93-775f-4a43-9b4a-6193c55d9bca X-Archives-Hash: 92e978ec6a6def85a047e19ced499bae Christian Faulhammer posted on Sun, 08 Nov 2009 16:13:22 +0100 as excerpted: > Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net>: >> 1) Users using ** in their package.keywords file should know enough >> about what they're doing to use their own package.mask, as well. If >> they're using ** in the keywords file, they're /saying/ they're readin= g >> to handle such things, after all, why shouldn't we let them? >=20 > They do it, because they don't know what they are doing. Just seen it > somewhere, heard about it. During LinuxTag the question why ** unmasks > some live ebuilds occured at least three times. Real user question numbers like that are useful to know. Thanks. Sure=20 beats general hand-wavy arguments (like mine too, was). =3D:^) --=20 Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman