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 1QeMwK-0001M8-7M for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Wed, 06 Jul 2011 07:54:34 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id E8E8321C043; Wed, 6 Jul 2011 07:52:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-yw0-f53.google.com (mail-yw0-f53.google.com [209.85.213.53]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8313621C043 for ; Wed, 6 Jul 2011 07:52:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ywm21 with SMTP id 21so3725436ywm.40 for ; Wed, 06 Jul 2011 00:52:08 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=meLyElL2ShUlA18tAHxCK4pzDyQ9OhJEoTEejo29iVc=; b=VLlxTyAJxmvcoQim9nkwdH7DmkN2YJ2GP0SHsvzCH5+/sTcOsRf+q7D0qZetFj/c0v DzbyDylbwM3vCnbSq+qcBOM1IiGgAFSfqtEonrXspTvCqtcDHt7F+O0GawZY5FwSpixV ldOUVn6yoGZA1YprfH8Be0jo7Yt2PTmS6V3bY= Received: by 10.150.170.16 with SMTP id s16mr7258101ybe.63.1309938727864; Wed, 06 Jul 2011 00:52:07 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.2.5] (adsl-98-95-129-33.jan.bellsouth.net [98.95.129.33]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id e23sm1621402anp.12.2011.07.06.00.52.06 (version=SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 06 Jul 2011 00:52:07 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4E141425.2020709@gmail.com> Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2011 02:52:05 -0500 From: Dale User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux x86_64; en-US; rv:1.9.1.19) Gecko/20110705 Gentoo/2.0.14-r1 SeaMonkey/2.0.14 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 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] emerge --autounmask-write: specify file References: <4E131CA2.8060408@gmx.ch> <4E1334C1.6040207@gmail.com> <20110705194434.1197f69c@digimed.co.uk> <4E137778.5040204@gmail.com> <20110705224212.18356948@digimed.co.uk> <4E13E2ED.3060807@gmail.com> <20110706082823.562f800e@zaphod.digimed.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <20110706082823.562f800e@zaphod.digimed.co.uk> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: X-Archives-Hash: 8d10a0a299f470cde69e785f203dc812 Neil Bothwick wrote: > On Tue, 05 Jul 2011 23:22:05 -0500, Dale wrote: > > >> Wouldn't this be like putting package.* back to a file instead of a >> directory tho? That would seem like one step forward and two steps >> back. Maybe I am missing something again. I sort of got some "issues" >> going on around here. :/ >> > No, the discussion is about the name of the file in package.unmask. if > that is a file there is no issue. The problem is that portage just picks > a file from that directory, it should either have its own file in there or > add the entries to a file named after the package. > > > I agree but it doesn't do that. Of course, as I described, having many files makes it difficult to find what file contains what too. Dale :-) :-)