| 1 |
Aron Griffis said: |
| 2 |
> The only thing I really dislike about the "marked keyword" |
| 3 |
> approach is that it requires changes in the *user's* portage to |
| 4 |
> handle the marking. But only solutions III and IV avoid that so |
| 5 |
> far. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
This is really a pretty annoying problem. As far as I can see, it would |
| 8 |
require some hacking backwards compatibility fake profiles to exist at |
| 9 |
"default-+x86-1.4" and so forth to avoid breaking everyone's systems with |
| 10 |
old portages. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
Another option would be to avoid the KEYWORDS variable entirely and use a |
| 13 |
new variable. This would avoid the annoying problem of backwards |
| 14 |
compatibility and user change. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
Examples: |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Option 1: |
| 19 |
MAINTAINER_ARCHS="x86 sparc" |
| 20 |
This indicates that if either of these are stable, the PM(s) consider(s) |
| 21 |
the package stable. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Option 2: |
| 24 |
STABLE="yes" |
| 25 |
STABLE="no" |
| 26 |
This is pretty straightforward, so I won't go in depth here. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
Thanks, |
| 29 |
Donnie |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
-- |
| 34 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives