On Friday 03 December 2004 23:13, Ciaran McCreesh wrote:
> On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 22:26:17 +0900 Jason Stubbs <jstubbs@g.o>
>
> wrote:
> | # ln -sf /usr/portage/profiles/base /etc/make.profile
> | # emerge -p system
> |
> | These are the packages that I would merge, in order:
> |
> | !!! ARCH is not set... Are you missing the /etc/make.profile symlink?
> | !!! Is the symlink correct? Is your portage tree complete?
>
> Indeed. So... Can anyone think of a better name than "inherit-only"? Can
> anyone think of a good way of indicating this other than by an empty
> file? Would it be reasonable for me to file a bug asking that at some
> point in the future portage detects the existence of said file and
> displays a better message instead?

Heh.. It'd take about 2 minutes to write and test the 3 lines of code to 
implement said enhancement. The question is, is this the correct enhancement. 
If so, why? I'd be more inclined to use a file to define a profile as being 
"valid" rather than "invalid".

Perhaps a "description" file that describes the purpose of that profile. 
Perhaps even a metadata.xml that contains the purpose of that specific 
profile directory within its cascade as well as a flag indicating to portage 
whether it's intented to be linked to.

Anyway, whatever happens - please, no bugs!! ;)

Regards,
Jason Stubbs

--
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list