Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Jeremy Olexa <darkside@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Diff between Funtoo and Gentoo as an overlay
Date: Sat, 22 Aug 2009 03:40:25
Message-Id: 4A8F68A5.8020706@gentoo.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Re: Diff between Funtoo and Gentoo as an overlay by Nikos Chantziaras
1 Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
2 > On 08/22/2009 05:59 AM, Nikos Chantziaras wrote:
3 >> On 08/22/2009 05:39 AM, Sebastian Pipping wrote:
4 >>> Sebastian Pipping wrote:
5 >>>> Commits are done automatically, triggering and pushing is
6 >>>> manual at the moment.
7 >>>
8 >>> By now a cron-based setup is running syncing the pure-funtoo overlay
9 >>> (and therefore also its atom and rss feeds) every 24 hours.
10 >>
11 >> There seems to be a bit of (minimal) duplication between pure-funtoo and
12 >> sunrise.
13 >
14 > Uhm, I just discovered that there are conflicts with portage too. That
15 > is not good. After I added pure-funtoo, it messed up my emerge -u world
16 > (stuff like wanting to upgrade to sys-apps/baselayout-2.1.5).
17 >
18 > pure-funtoo should not offer packages available in portage (sunrise is
19 > the lesser evil).
20
21 Huh? This is true of all overlays. If my overlay had baselayout-5.0 in
22 it, you would be upgrading to that version if you had my overlay... By
23 nature of overlays themselves, you should know what you are doing and
24 how to handle it (ie. mask >=sys-apps/baselayout-2.0.1)
25
26 -Jeremy

Replies

Subject Author
[gentoo-dev] Re: Diff between Funtoo and Gentoo as an overlay Nikos Chantziaras <realnc@×××××.de>