Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Alexander Gretencord <arutha@×××.de>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] [last rites] media-gfx/sodipodi
Date: Sun, 02 Apr 2006 23:44:35
Message-Id: 200604021948.43378.arutha@gmx.de
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] [last rites] media-gfx/sodipodi by Carsten Lohrke
1 On Sunday 02 April 2006 17:23, Carsten Lohrke wrote:
2 > This is not the case. At least unless the user actively looks at
3 > package.mask. Since Portage doesn't provide the information, this point is
4 > void. And even if - four weeks are a too long, imho.
5
6 As Andrej Kacian already noted, there are quite some people that don't sync
7 every week. My general feeling is that most gentoo devs are far too fast in
8 their decision/actions. As I already stated elsewhere in this thread, I
9 generally only sync when I need to upgrade for feature/bug-/security-fixes
10 and I don't see why that would be a bad idea. That way I get the benefits of
11 gentoo but don't spend all day merging stuff that will have a new version two
12 hours later :)
13
14 Regarding your argument that you have to be actively looking at p.mask, that
15 is not entirely true because a verbose world/system merge will tell you about
16 a masked package, although I do think that this is not enough and even the
17 message in verbose mode is not really noticeable. But just because portage
18 does not really alert the user anyway, does not mean that masking first is
19 bad, does it? I think the reporting of missing/masked packages in portage has
20 to be improved, instead of removing the masking process :)
21
22 Just my 0.02EUR.
23
24
25 Alex
26 --
27 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list