| 1 |
On Sun, 13 Sep 2009 21:45:59 +0200 |
| 2 |
Sebastian Pipping <webmaster@××××××××.org> wrote: |
| 3 |
> Alexander Færøy wrote: |
| 4 |
> >> Second issue: "I want foopackage and barpackage, but not your |
| 5 |
> >> hacked gcc" Overlays can overshadow tree packages, which can have |
| 6 |
> >> undesired effects. |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> > Support for overlay information in package.mask? |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Once we have repository-specific atoms we get that for free. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Not quite. If both an overlay and the main tree provide foo-1.2, |
| 13 |
masking foo-1.2::overlay in Portage would end up masking every foo-1.2. |
| 14 |
You also need proper multiple repository support to make it work; |
| 15 |
merely adding repo dep specs on top of a pure overlay model isn't |
| 16 |
enough. |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
-- |
| 19 |
Ciaran McCreesh |
Archives