Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ulrich Mueller <ulm@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Feature request: package.use.stable.mask and package.use.stable.force
Date: Fri, 27 Apr 2012 13:50:42
Message-Id: 20378.41951.894887.57515@a1i15.kph.uni-mainz.de
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Feature request: package.use.stable.mask and package.use.stable.force by "Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn"
>>>>> On Fri, 27 Apr 2012, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
> Ciaran McCreesh schrieb: >>> * two new files in profile directories supported, >>> package.use.stable.mask and package.use.stable.force >>> * syntax is identical to package.use.mask and package.use.force >>> * meaning is identical to package.use.mask and package.use.force, >>> except that the resulting rules are ONLY applied iff a stable keyword >>> is in use >> This means that an ebuild will effectively change when moved from >> ~arch to arch. The point of ~arch is to test ebuilds before they're >> moved to arch.
> I agree that the ~arch ebuilds should be tested in the same > configuration in which they will end up in arch. However in this > case, the possible configurations for arch are a subset of those in > ~arch, so the testing covers those too.
Maybe I'm missing something, but what would happen when the newest version of a package is marked stable? The masked USE flags would become unavailable for everyone? Ulrich

Replies