| 1 |
On 18 Aug 2002 16:31:21 +1000 |
| 2 |
Troy Dack <troy@××××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Sun, 2002-08-18 at 14:04, Jonathan Kelly wrote: |
| 5 |
> > I beg to differ ... I did this with media-gfx/povray and after every |
| 6 |
> > "emerge sync" I get .... |
| 7 |
> > # emerge -pu povray |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> My apologies, I thought that the local ebuilds were NOT checked against |
| 10 |
> packages.mask. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> I've just tried the same thing as you, with the same results. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> It would make sense (to me anyway) if the local ebuilds in |
| 15 |
> $PORTDIR_OVERLAY were *NOT* checked against packages.mask, that way us |
| 16 |
> end users could assist the developers by simply dropping masked ebuilds |
| 17 |
> into our local tree and then testing them. Sure it means that there is |
| 18 |
> duplication and some extra hard drive space taken up, but ebuilds aren't |
| 19 |
> that big. Also for those wishing to test ebuilds it would be a |
| 20 |
> conscious decision to place a masked ebuild in your local tree. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
I think that is a logical and great idea. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
Cheers. |
| 25 |
Jonathan Kelly. |
Archives