1 |
On Sat, Aug 27, 2005 at 01:17:50PM +0200, Kevin F. Quinn wrote: |
2 |
> On 27/8/2005 10:42:25, Brian Harring (ferringb@g.o) wrote: |
3 |
> > Hola all. |
4 |
> > |
5 |
> > Straight to the point, I'm proposing that the following files- |
6 |
> > arch.list |
7 |
> > categories |
8 |
> > use.desc |
9 |
> > use.local.desc |
10 |
> > package.mask |
11 |
> > updates |
12 |
> > |
13 |
> > be moved out of the profiles directory in the tree |
14 |
> |
15 |
> Not sure about package.mask. I thought that was part of the profile, |
16 |
> as different profiles might package.mask separately. I know I use it |
17 |
> in /etc/profile to postpone updates. |
18 |
Rough filtering stack- |
19 |
profiles/package.mask |
20 |
/etc/make.profile/package.mask (incremental through subprofiles) |
21 |
users package.mask, and users package.unmask |
22 |
|
23 |
Ordered it in that fashion to show that it's effectively repository |
24 |
filtering, profile filtering, user filtering; if you view it as |
25 |
seperate entities with filters stacked up (how the rewrite implements |
26 |
it), package.mask being repository metadata becomes clear. |
27 |
|
28 |
Basically, think of it this way; what files/data *must* stay with a |
29 |
repository? If I'm using (say) gentopia ebuilds, the p.mask they use |
30 |
is specific to _their_ repository; my official gentoo repository |
31 |
should not be p.mask'ing there stuff, it should only affect itself, |
32 |
and any repository that is slaved to it (overlays, which aren't stand |
33 |
alone). |
34 |
|
35 |
At least that's what I think :) |
36 |
~harring |