| 1 |
On 3/13/08, Steve Dibb <beandog@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Hey guys, |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> I have an idea I'd like to run by the QA team. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> For a user's portage preferences, we can have /etc/package.mask be a |
| 7 |
> file or a directory of files (package.mask/*) that will cumulatively |
| 8 |
> create the same effect. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Because package.mask in CVS for profiles is so huge, I think it might |
| 11 |
> help it to get organized if we split it up a bit. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> halcyon had a good idea for the scheme: testing, broken, removal. That |
| 14 |
> seems to sum up the main 3 reason that a package would be masked. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> Right now there are 679 entries in package.mask. The reason I came up |
| 17 |
> with the idea was to find a way to make it easier for treecleaners to |
| 18 |
> quickly see which ones they were working on. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> I'd like to take the discussion to -dev but wanted to get QA's thoughts |
| 21 |
> first. I haven't looked into whether or not this is technically |
| 22 |
> feasible at all. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Yes, I'm sure some will want a GLEP. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
my proposal would be to create in gentoo-x86, a package.mask.d type dir |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Come up with a naming scheme. |
| 29 |
Come up with a tool that can check for duplicate mask entries. |
| 30 |
Cat all the entries together to form a legacy package.mask so we don't |
| 31 |
have to deal with backwards compat. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Probably use this cat'd package.mask file for the PM with a stat() |
| 34 |
call on the packge.mask.d dir to force the PM to generate the 'cache'. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
-Alec |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
> |
| 39 |
> Steve |
| 40 |
> |
| 41 |
> |
| 42 |
> -- |
| 43 |
> gentoo-qa@l.g.o mailing list |
| 44 |
> |
| 45 |
> |
| 46 |
-- |
| 47 |
gentoo-qa@l.g.o mailing list |
Archives