| 1 |
Grant Goodyear wrote: |
| 2 |
>>IMO, if there is no such functionality already, we need to provide a |
| 3 |
>>clean way for the users to maintain local overrides to the |
| 4 |
>>package.mask file. |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>>Suppose that we make ebuild system support /etc/package.unmask file. |
| 7 |
>>I could even take a shot at this if no-one objects. |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>>p.s. Something tells me that /usr/portage/profiles/ is not the right |
| 10 |
>>place for package.mask. |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> You might want to add this idea of local overrides as a portage |
| 14 |
> "enhancement" on bugs.gentoo.org. My own feeling is that as Gentoo |
| 15 |
> starts being used as a base for other distributions, we'll want to |
| 16 |
> support, at a minimum, profile-specific package.mask files. A user |
| 17 |
> could then always create his/her own profile (or just replace the |
| 18 |
> /etc/make.profile symlink with a real directory), and that |
| 19 |
> profile-specific package.mask would _not_ be overwritten. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
IMHO, this is the proper solution. The files in /usr/portage are |
| 22 |
controlled by Gentoo. If you want to keep customized stuff, it should go |
| 23 |
somewhere else. Just create a copy of the default profile outside of |
| 24 |
portage and link it to make.profile and edit the packages file. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
Has local ebuild repository functionality been added to portage yet? |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
-- |
| 31 |
Chad Huneycutt try { Windows } |
| 32 |
Ph.D. Student catch ( Exception BSOD ) |
| 33 |
Georgia Tech College of Computing { linux }; |
| 34 |
http://www.cc.gatech.edu/~chadh |
Archives