| 1 |
Grant posted on Fri, 25 May 2012 23:01:42 -0700 as excerpted: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
>>> May I ask why you force the g-cpan category to dev-perl? |
| 4 |
>> |
| 5 |
>> Using that category solves many issues in advance, ie: if you generated |
| 6 |
>> an ebuild locally, and then we provided a maintained copy, |
| 7 |
>> portage would just switch from one to the other seamlessly where needed |
| 8 |
>> without you having to modify all ebuilds that depend on it. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
> I was thinking it would be nice to know which ebuilds came from g-cpan, |
| 11 |
> but now that I think about it I suppose it doesn't really matter. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Not a perl-head, but if I've been following the thread correctly... |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
If you manage the overlays correctly (see the earlier note about it using |
| 16 |
the last one in the list), you'll know based on what overlay the ebuild |
| 17 |
is from. Simply create an overlay specifically for g-cpan and make it |
| 18 |
last in the list. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
Simple enough, assuming I'm not horribly mixed up, anyway. =:^) |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
-- |
| 23 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
| 24 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
| 25 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman |
Archives