| 1 |
On Mon, Jul 28, 2014 at 8:41 PM, Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net> wrote: |
| 2 |
> AFAIK, gentoo policy is that live ebuilds should always be masked so as |
| 3 |
> never to be automatically pulled in without a deliberate unmasking of the |
| 4 |
> live ebuild, but whether that's masked due to lack of keywords (ebuild), |
| 5 |
> or due to hard-mask (package.mask) is I believe up to the maintainer. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
The policy apparently disappeared in the shuffling of documentation |
| 8 |
which occurred over the years. But here is what I was instructed to |
| 9 |
teach recruits back when I became a recruiter in 2006 or 2007, and |
| 10 |
what competent developers have been doing since even before I was a |
| 11 |
developer: |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
The package.mask file is only for temporary masking, even if more or |
| 14 |
less long term. Anything that should be permanently masked has no |
| 15 |
place in the tree. Live ebuilds should not be keyworded, reflecting |
| 16 |
the fact that the code they're pulling has not be tested for any |
| 17 |
architecture due to it being live. Moreover, live ebuilds should not |
| 18 |
be masked as this results in unnecessary cruft in the package.mask |
| 19 |
file. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Denis. |
Archives