| 1 |
On 27-01-2012 16:15:23 +0100, justin wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 27/01/12 15:10, Fabian Groffen wrote: |
| 3 |
> > On 27-01-2012 14:32:59 +0100, justin wrote: |
| 4 |
> >> As far as I know there will be change for the ordinary usability of the |
| 5 |
> >> prefix tree. also for the dev setups I don't see a problem, because the |
| 6 |
> >> change allows the lower overlays to find its master, which shouldn't |
| 7 |
> >> effect the rsync-tree/prefix-overlay combination as such. |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > do you overlay on the svn tree, or the prefix rsync tree? |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> > |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> the prefix rsync tree. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
ok, the prefix rsync tree has repo_name = gentoo_prefix |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
the prefix svn tree has no repo_name |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
(I have it locally, with repo_name set to gentoo) |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
So you want an alias in the prefix rsync tree to "gentoo"? |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
hmmm, I don't think that would hurt anyone, does it? |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Fabian Groffen |
| 29 |
Gentoo on a different level |
Archives