1 |
Am Freitag, 28. Dezember 2012, 11:19:23 schrieb Michał Górny: |
2 |
> |
3 |
> I don't think we can really avoid having the current 'base' profile, |
4 |
> and I don't think that we should even try doing that. As far as I can |
5 |
> see, the idea would be to mask the flags completely in base profile, |
6 |
> and unmask in *stable.mask files. Do I get it correctly? |
7 |
|
8 |
[see also attached modified graphs] |
9 |
|
10 |
The idea would be *for the transition period*: have an additional directory |
11 |
base5, which contains eapi=5, the stable mask files and nothing else. |
12 |
|
13 |
After the transition period, these files are merged into the main profile |
14 |
directory, the base5 directory is removed from inheritance and deleted. |
15 |
|
16 |
During the transition period, an old installation using deprecated 10.0 |
17 |
profile will "not see the stable mask files", which means the additional |
18 |
useflag restrictions are just not enforced. Repoman will check against non- |
19 |
deprecated profiles, which means it uses the 13.0 path. |
20 |
|
21 |
[Given the position in the depgraph, maybe a different name instead of base5 |
22 |
would make sense. I just wanted to stick to the description from the last e- |
23 |
mail.] |
24 |
|
25 |
-- |
26 |
Andreas K. Huettel |
27 |
Gentoo Linux developer |
28 |
dilfridge@g.o |
29 |
http://www.akhuettel.de/ |