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 1QyK6H-0002sq-2Q for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 08:55:17 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 7A46421C243; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 08:55:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail.digimed.co.uk (82-69-83-178.dsl.in-addr.zen.co.uk [82.69.83.178]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 906D621C1D4 for ; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 08:54:06 +0000 (UTC) Received: from zaphod.digimed.co.uk (zaphod.digimed.co.uk [192.168.1.1]) by mail.digimed.co.uk (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id C5317804D4 for ; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 09:54:05 +0100 (BST) Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 09:54:05 +0100 From: Neil Bothwick To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Important package blocked by another important package Message-ID: <20110830095405.2f77d6a4@zaphod.digimed.co.uk> In-Reply-To: References: <20110830022716.GC6313@solfire> <20110830032927.GF6313@solfire> <4E5C9874.6060505@darkmetatron.de> Organization: Digital Media Production X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.10cvs7 (GTK+ 2.24.5; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu) X-GPG-Fingerprint: 7260 0F33 97EC 2F1E 7667 FE37 BA6E 1A97 4375 1903 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: multipart/signed; micalg=PGP-SHA1; boundary="Sig_/NDmlMti=u_JVPG_ZEEwqREE"; protocol="application/pgp-signature" X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: a0f8459e9fca5b7697460aebfc2bdf8b --Sig_/NDmlMti=u_JVPG_ZEEwqREE Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, 30 Aug 2011 15:41:48 +0700, Pandu Poluan wrote: > Or, to be more precise, I have a common package.accept_keywords for > all my Gentoo systems, some of them x86 and others amd64, so it's a > habit of mine to unmask both :) It's just as easy to unmask neither. If an entry in package.unmask does not specify an arch, portage automatically using the testing version of whatever is in make.conf. PS, please don't top post. --=20 Neil Bothwick WITLAG: The delay between delivery and comprehension of a joke. --Sig_/NDmlMti=u_JVPG_ZEEwqREE Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc Content-Disposition: attachment; filename=signature.asc -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.18 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAk5cpS0ACgkQum4al0N1GQOGfwCdEks5589+rvsfv8NlU8p4R47r gGEAoNl6n43OBzuI2Da+tbmLQ911eLxH =HI4a -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --Sig_/NDmlMti=u_JVPG_ZEEwqREE--