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 1QZrUA-0003Po-GK for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 23 Jun 2011 21:30:50 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 1EE371C0A2; Thu, 23 Jun 2011 21:27:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.ukfsn.org (mail.ukfsn.org [77.75.108.10]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CBC821C0A2 for ; Thu, 23 Jun 2011 21:27:55 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost (smtp-filter.ukfsn.org [192.168.54.205]) by mail.ukfsn.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E116DDEC41 for ; Thu, 23 Jun 2011 22:27:54 +0100 (BST) Received: from mail.ukfsn.org ([192.168.54.25]) by localhost (smtp-filter.ukfsn.org [192.168.54.205]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Os+eoYPOK8xK for ; Thu, 23 Jun 2011 22:27:54 +0100 (BST) Received: from wstn.localnet (unknown [78.32.181.186]) by mail.ukfsn.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B4AB8DEBAE for ; Thu, 23 Jun 2011 22:27:54 +0100 (BST) From: Peter Humphrey Organization: at home To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: Do we have to build gcc with fortran now? Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2011 22:27:53 +0100 User-Agent: KMail/1.13.7 (Linux/2.6.38-gentoo-r6; KDE/4.6.3; x86_64; ; ) References: <4E0167C4.9080100@gmail.com> <20110622171856.2cca9be4@zaphod.digimed.co.uk> <4E022A8F.8090403@gmail.com> In-Reply-To: <4E022A8F.8090403@gmail.com> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="iso-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Message-Id: <201106232227.54084.peter@humphrey.ukfsn.org> X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 2c00cdd06eb2ec419cebd18ed5d0ac43 On Wednesday 22 June 2011 18:46:55 Dale wrote: > Neil Bothwick wrote: > > On Wed, 22 Jun 2011 17:54:49 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: > >>>> Use a directory for package.use, it makes it far easier to > >>>> manage. All of /etc/portage/package.* are directories here. > >>> > >>> I have done that for package.keywords and unmask. In ways it is > >>> easier but in ways, it is a nightmare. If something is unmasked, I > >>> have to go find the file that unmasked it. I have several since I > >>> use autounmask for most of it. Then add in that the new autounmask > >>> part of emerge seems to pick a random file to add too. At that > >>> point, not much makes sense anymore. > >> > >> grep is your very very good friend Hear, hear! > > So is giving the files sensible names :) > > That was what I liked about autounmask, the tree version not the portage > one. It gave them some names at least. Still felt like looking for a > needle in a haystack sometimes tho. I'm with you, Dale. I have no /etc/portage/package.* directories here on this amd64 box - I just keep entries in alphabetical order in single files. I find it easier. I've also found it much easier to manage flags etc by setting the kde profile (this being a kde box, of course - gnome is too arrogant for me). It makes for a nice, simple USE line in make.conf. -- Rgds Peter