Archives
Archives
| From: | Sebastian Redl <sebastian.redl@×××××××××××.at> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-amd64@l.g.o | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-amd64] ~amd64 vs portage.unmask | ||
| Date: | Tue, 27 Jan 2009 23:08:40 | ||
| Message-Id: | 497F93F3.6010901@getdesigned.at | ||
| In Reply to: | [gentoo-amd64] ~amd64 vs portage.unmask by Mark Knecht |
||
| 1 | Mark Knecht wrote: |
| 2 | > I seem to be a bit confused about the correct usage of ~amd64 vs |
| 3 | > unmasking a package in the portage.unmask file. Thanks in advance. |
| 4 | > |
| 5 | > |
| 6 | > What's the proper way for me to limit glib at the currently installed |
| 7 | > revision level? |
| 8 | > |
| 9 | > |
| 10 | portage.unmask is for masking, portage.keywords for keywording. These |
| 11 | are not the same. |
| 12 | |
| 13 | You can accept the ~amd64 keyword for just a single version the same way |
| 14 | you can unmask just a single version. Put this in portage.keywords: |
| 15 | |
| 16 | =dev-libs/glib-2.18.4 ~amd64 |
| 17 | |
| 18 | |
| 19 | Sebastian |
| Subject | Author |
|---|---|
| Re: [gentoo-amd64] ~amd64 vs portage.unmask | Mark Knecht <markknecht@×××××.com> |
| [gentoo-amd64] Re: ~amd64 vs portage.unmask | Nikos Chantziaras <realnc@×××××.de> |