1 |
On Fri, 2020-08-14 at 17:31 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
|
2 |
> > > > > > On Fri, 14 Aug 2020, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
> > When pkgs are masked in the profile, it affects all variants of that |
5 |
> > pkgs, even the ones that are in other overlays. |
6 |
> > Example: |
7 |
> > !!! The following installed packages are masked: |
8 |
> > - sys-auth/sssd-9999::transmode (masked by: package.mask) |
9 |
> > /usr/portage/profiles/package.mask: |
10 |
> > # Matt Turner <mattst88@g.o> (2020-08-13) |
11 |
> > # Masked for testing |
12 |
> |
13 |
> > My sssd-9999 is now masked. |
14 |
> |
15 |
> > Could the profile syntax be extended to include syntax allowed in |
16 |
> > /etc/portage ? Then one could use the ::gentoo syntax (or so I hope) |
17 |
> |
18 |
> The :: syntax is Portage specific and doesn't exist in EAPI 7. |
19 |
> So there's no chance to get it into the profile dir anytime soon |
20 |
> (because that would imply :: to be added to a future EAPI and the |
21 |
> top-level profile dir to be bumped to that EAPI). |
22 |
|
23 |
Is profile part of EAPI? masks are not defined/used in ebuilds directly.
|
24 |
|
25 |
> |
26 |
> You could override the mask in your overlay's profile/package.mask |
27 |
> instead, using an entry with the "-" operator. |
28 |
|
29 |
Yes, I know I can add that in profile/package.mask but I am looking for the bigger
|
30 |
picture here. This has to stop somehow, there need to be something that limits
|
31 |
the mask scope to the repo/overlay it is defined.
|
32 |
|
33 |
I think a good start would be to consider /etc/portage the top profile and other
|
34 |
subprofiles should be able to use the same features as /etc/portage.
|
35 |
|
36 |
Portage could start supporting that now, but there would be a while until
|
37 |
one can use them in Gentoo profile.
|
38 |
|
39 |
Meanwhile one should ban masks containing > and instead use exact revision of the package.
|
40 |
|
41 |
Jocke |