From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from lists.gentoo.org ([140.105.134.102] helo=robin.gentoo.org) by nuthatch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DtAtv-0001Gv-Lf for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Thu, 14 Jul 2005 21:05:48 +0000 Received: from robin.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with SMTP id j6EL4Gp8016514; Thu, 14 Jul 2005 21:04:16 GMT Received: from smtp15.wxs.nl (smtp15.wxs.nl [195.121.6.54]) by robin.gentoo.org (8.13.4/8.13.4) with ESMTP id j6EKwRUG023361 for ; Thu, 14 Jul 2005 20:58:27 GMT Received: from [10.0.0.150] (ip3e83ab52.speed.planet.nl [62.131.171.82]) by smtp15.wxs.nl (iPlanet Messaging Server 5.2 Patch 2 (built Jul 14 2004)) with ESMTP id <0IJM004HLY9OIQ@smtp15.wxs.nl> for gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org; Thu, 14 Jul 2005 22:58:36 +0200 (CEST) Date: Thu, 14 Jul 2005 22:58:21 +0200 From: Holly Bostick Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Subversion 1.2 In-reply-to: <42D6C170.6090402@shic.co.uk> To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Message-id: <42D6D1ED.8050409@planet.nl> Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT X-Accept-Language: nl-NL, nl, en User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050624) X-Enigmail-Version: 0.92.0.0 References: <42D6859E.6050406@shic.co.uk> <42D6A049.8080609@gmx.net> <42D6ACFB.3010507@shic.co.uk> <42D6B054.7050606@saunalahti.fi> <42D6C170.6090402@shic.co.uk> X-Archives-Salt: c99da910-9d59-45b9-b5c3-b2c0adad7613 X-Archives-Hash: a8067a379fef6e68a6103f314eef3390 Steve [Gentoo] schreef: > when I use ACCEPT_KEYWORDS in place of USE it now behaves just how I had > previously expected it should have done. > > # ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~x86" emerge -uD subversion > > This does what I'd originally intended to try... (and doesn't force me > to remember how to spell the dependencies.) I assume there's no > significant advantage I've missed in preferring to use the > package.keywords file instead? Advantage in using ACCEPT_KEYWORDS over /etc/portage/package.keywords? Only in the case that you want to quickly test an unstable package, but are not sure if you want to keep it. The thing is.... Portage doesn't *remember* ACCEPT_KEYWORDS, beyond the original compile in which it is used. So if you use it, and keep the package, as soon as you do an emerge -u world, Portage will try to downgrade the package to the last stable version, which is the only one that it knows to be allowed (because /etc/make.conf says "xarch", not "~arch", and no exception for this particular package and its dependencies has been made in /etc/portage/package.keywords). This becomes especially frustrating if you do an emerge -uD world, and it's not the main package, but one of the *dependencies* or deep dependencies which forces a downgrade-- if the formerly unstable package has been upgraded to stable, but depends on a package that has not yet been upgraded, emerge -U(D) world can quickly become a hellish cycle of the main package downgrading and then upgrading in the same or sequential operations.... until you add the relevant packages to /etc/portage/package.keywords and stop the madness. However, if you find that the package is in fact too unstable for your needs, the fact that it will be automatically downgraded at your next emerge -u world is a nice safety net-- but you only need a safety net if you're explicitly testing something and really don't know if it's going to work out for you or not. If you know you want it, then add it to package.keywords. If you're not sure, but don't have the time or energy to explicitly test and make a final determination, then wait until it's stable. It's a beautiful system :-) . Holly -- gentoo-user@gentoo.org mailing list