Re: [gentoo-user] Re: license mask

[Chris Reffett <mellitussum@verizon.net>]

[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1594 bytes --]

Dale wrote:
> Chris Reffett wrote:
>   
>> Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
>>     
>>> On 10/19/2009 03:33 AM, Crístian Viana wrote:
>>>       
>>>> hi!
>>>>
>>>> when I try to update virtualbox-ose-additions, portage says:
>>>>
>>>> !!! All ebuilds that could satisfy
>>>> "~app-emulation/virtualbox-ose-additions-3.0.8" have been masked.
>>>> !!! One of the following masked packages is required to complete your
>>>> request:
>>>> - app-emulation/virtualbox-ose-additions-3.0.8 (masked by: PUEL
>>>> license(s))
>>>> A copy of the 'PUEL' license is located at
>>>> '/usr/portage/licenses/PUEL'.
>>>>
>>>> it suggests me to read the Gentoo Handbook, but it isn't updated.
>>>>
>>>> what should I do to unmask this package? I've never seen this kind of
>>>> masking.
>>>>         
>>> In make.conf:
>>>
>>>   ACCEPT_LICENSE="*"
>>>
>>> to unmask all licenses.  Or else name the licenses you wish unmasked
>>> one by one.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>       
>> Yeah, they added this in a recent portage-2.2 rc. It masks end user
>> license agreements by default (-@EULA is the syntax, if I recall
>> correctly)
>>
>>
>>     
>
> I checked make.conf.example and this is not documented yet.  I'm on
> portage-2.2_rc46.  Is it in a later version or did I miss something? 
> The file I checked is here:
>
> /usr/share/portage/config/make.conf.example
>
> Just curious.
>
> Dale
>
> :-)  
You've got a recent enough version, I think it came in around rc44 or 
so. Look in 'man make.conf' for the info on it...I guess they haven't 
changed make.conf.example yet.

[-- Attachment #2: Type: text/html, Size: 2039 bytes --]