From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 4428 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2004 13:48:55 +0000 Received: from smtp.gentoo.org (156.56.111.197) by lists.gentoo.org with AES256-SHA encrypted SMTP; 23 Oct 2004 13:48:55 +0000 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([156.56.111.196] helo=parrot.gentoo.org) by smtp.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.41) id 1CLMGM-0004pO-Op for arch-gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org; Sat, 23 Oct 2004 13:48:54 +0000 Received: (qmail 22779 invoked by uid 89); 23 Oct 2004 13:48:53 +0000 Mailing-List: contact gentoo-portage-dev-help@gentoo.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail Reply-To: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org X-BeenThere: gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org Received: (qmail 240 invoked from network); 23 Oct 2004 13:48:53 +0000 From: Jason Stubbs To: gentoo-portage-dev@lists.gentoo.org Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2004 22:50:55 +0900 User-Agent: KMail/1.7 References: <20041023121715.78153.qmail@web41524.mail.yahoo.com> In-Reply-To: <20041023121715.78153.qmail@web41524.mail.yahoo.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Message-Id: <200410232250.55610.jstubbs@gentoo.org> Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] two remarks on portage-2.0.51-r2 X-Archives-Salt: 62e3d82c-9496-4336-8c65-71b0051a7104 X-Archives-Hash: 76951ddd41a1ca225f07f471bdaa8208 On Saturday 23 October 2004 21:17, Pablo De Napoli wrote: > I see that portage-2.0.51-r2 is now stable. > However, It has some useful features that are deprecated or broken. > > 1) emerge --upgradeonly > > Why is this deprecated? I think it is endeed a useful feature. > I'm not sure that the files /etc/portage/package* are a good (esay-to-use) > replacement for it. Downgrades happen when: * a package's versioning changes and it is actually an upgrade, * a package is broken and dangerous, or * masking has been bypassed in some way. In the first two cases, you want the change to happen. In the third, /etc/portage/package* serves you much better. > 2) emerge ebuild by path > > Acording to the man page, this is broken, however it is the most obvious > way to specify an ebuild, isn't it? > > Why is this feature broken, could anybody find out? It was always broken. It is fact now slightly less broken than it was in 2.0.50. At least now it'll prevent tell you when you are going to install something unmasked - which is it's main use by developers - and actually cancel the merge when it's not about to merge that which you asked for. > I think is very important to keep the quality of portage to the highest > standards, so I suggest not to realese as stable a version with important > features broken. No offense but I find this almost comical. Have a look on bugs.g.o for portage bugs. You'd be surprised I think. 2.0.51 has bugs - even a couple of new ones that should be fixed soon - but there's nothing really broken that wasn't broken before. Regards, Jason Stubbs -- gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list