| 1 |
>>version |
| 2 |
>>1.2.1 has the keyword ~x86 - so stable users don't get it although there's |
| 3 |
>>no reason for calling Mozilla 1.2.1 "unstable"... |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> It depends -possibly- on the xft-2 ebuild and that isn't marked stable |
| 6 |
> yet, that's the reason. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
If mozilla-1.2.1 is "unstable" because of _this_, I think that's an improper use of masking. There's really no point in masking something |
| 9 |
because its _dependencies_ are masked. If you do this, you would have to check each dependency, and if all of them are "stable", you can |
| 10 |
mask the package itself "stable" as well. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Instead, Portage should respect the "unstable" dependencies, and warn you that it can't install your "stable" package because some of its |
| 13 |
dependencies are "unstable". (Portage already does that, which is good.) |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
So again, there's no point in masking a package "unstable" just because its dependencies are "unstable". |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
-- |
| 18 |
Maik Schreiber, Gentoo Linux Developer |
| 19 |
http://www.gentoo.org |
| 20 |
mailto:blizzy@g.o |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
-- |
| 23 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives