| 1 |
El Mie, 28 de Enero de 2009, 4:21, Mark Knecht escribió: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> Makes sense. By giving the exact package revision I'm saying that's |
| 4 |
> the one I want. I don't need any additional wild card of any type. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Additionally is address my other frustrating with this where I want |
| 7 |
> and need some version, say 2.18.1, so I use ~amd64 to get it, and then over |
| 8 |
> time the system builds 2.18.2, 2.18.3, 2.18.4, etc., which I don't need |
| 9 |
> and personalyl don't want until one of them goes stable. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Just to clear it a bit. One thing is the version and another |
| 12 |
(unrelated) thing is the architecture. Having a version number |
| 13 |
has nothing to do with having or not having the architecture |
| 14 |
flag at the end of the line, they are separated matters. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
To keyword/unmask/mask or whatever a given version of a package |
| 17 |
you use =category/package, you could use <=, >=, > or < as well. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
About the architecture thingie, the whole point is that if you |
| 20 |
don't specify an architecture flag it assumes you mean the unstable |
| 21 |
branch of your default architecture. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
So, if you are in amd64 and you use this on package.keywords: |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
=category/package-x.y |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
It really means |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
=category/package-x.y ~amd64 |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
But if you are in x86 that line would be equivalent to |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
=category/package-x.y ~x86 |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
And do on. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
The fact that you specify a version doesn't have anything |
| 38 |
to do with the need for an arch flag. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
Additionally you should really read this if you have real |
| 42 |
interest in this thing: |
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
http://www.gentoo.org/doc/en/handbook/handbook-x86.xml?part=3&chap=3#doc_chap2 |
| 45 |
|
| 46 |
Regards. |
| 47 |
-- |
| 48 |
Jesús Guerrero |
Archives