| 1 |
On Tue, Jan 27, 2009 at 3:08 PM, Sebastian Redl |
| 2 |
<sebastian.redl@×××××××××××.at> wrote: |
| 3 |
> Mark Knecht wrote: |
| 4 |
>> I seem to be a bit confused about the correct usage of ~amd64 vs |
| 5 |
>> unmasking a package in the portage.unmask file. Thanks in advance. |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> What's the proper way for me to limit glib at the currently installed |
| 9 |
>> revision level? |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
> portage.unmask is for masking, portage.keywords for keywording. These |
| 13 |
> are not the same. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> You can accept the ~amd64 keyword for just a single version the same way |
| 16 |
> you can unmask just a single version. Put this in portage.keywords: |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> =dev-libs/glib-2.18.4 ~amd64 |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> Sebastian |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Thank you Sebastian. That worked fine. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
Now, the same thing didn't work for portage-2.2_rc23. For that one I |
| 26 |
actually had to add it to portage.unmask also. I think that's because |
| 27 |
it's actually hard masked? Is that correct? |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Cheers, |
| 30 |
Mark |
Archives