| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
Daniel Ostrow wrote: |
| 5 |
| Michael, |
| 6 |
| |
| 7 |
| Unless I am mistaken this problem is completely solved by |
| 8 |
| /etc/portage/package.{mask,unmask,keyword} read man portage for info. |
| 9 |
| |
| 10 |
I know, but having to maintain such a list by hand seems like extra unnessicary |
| 11 |
work. Is there a particular reason why it is set up in this way? It just |
| 12 |
seems to me like recognizing the existing packages in the two situations I |
| 13 |
previously mentioned would be a lot easier on the user. My question isn't so |
| 14 |
much how to solve it, but why is the solution is what it is. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
- -- |
| 18 |
Michael Marineau |
| 19 |
marineam@×××××××××.edu |
| 20 |
Oregon State University |
| 21 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 22 |
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (GNU/Linux) |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
iD8DBQFBAcy3iP+LossGzjARAslFAKDT2YGo0VIVIRLSZbKtnhnsrj1fnwCgpZ+B |
| 25 |
vDMQk2wssOCKrDB17Ahao90= |
| 26 |
=za34 |
| 27 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives