1 |
On 2018.03.23 09:48, Ulrich Mueller wrote: |
2 |
> >>>>> On Thu, 22 Mar 2018, Geaaru wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
> > for both portage and your fork I think that could be interesting add |
5 |
> > an extension to PMS for define inside profiles or targets masking of |
6 |
> > packages of a particular repslository. Currently PMS doesn't permit |
7 |
> > this but have this feature could be help users to define our |
8 |
> > profiles under overlays. |
9 |
> |
10 |
> > Something like this: |
11 |
> |
12 |
> > sys-devel/gcc::gentoo |
13 |
> |
14 |
> Conceptually that makes no sense. sys-devel/gcc is the name of an |
15 |
> upstream package, so what does it even mean to mask it in one |
16 |
> repository but not in another? If it's the same package, then it |
17 |
> should behave in the same way, regardless of the repository its ebuild |
18 |
> it hosted in (or the package being installed, in which case it is no |
19 |
> longer in an ebuild repository). |
20 |
> |
21 |
> If it is a different package however, then it should have a different |
22 |
> name. |
23 |
> |
24 |
> Ulrich |
25 |
> |
26 |
|
27 |
Ulrich, |
28 |
|
29 |
That has just irritated me. The use case is sdlmame. |
30 |
|
31 |
!!! The following installed packages are masked: |
32 |
- games-emulation/sdlmame-0.195::Pi_aarch64 (masked by: package.mask) |
33 |
/usr/portage/profiles/package.mask: |
34 |
# Pacho Ramos <pacho@g.o> (18 Mar 2018) |
35 |
# Fails to build (#634662), version bump long time pending (#596162). |
36 |
# Removal in a month. |
37 |
|
38 |
games-emulation/sdlmame is masked. I have a higher version in my |
39 |
overlay than the one in the tree and it gets masked too. |
40 |
Its not a problem to me as I know how to manage it. Its just untidy. |
41 |
|
42 |
With apologies to Pacho for citing his name in the worked |
43 |
example. |
44 |
|
45 |
-- |
46 |
Regards, |
47 |
|
48 |
Roy Bamford |
49 |
(Neddyseagoon) a member of |
50 |
elections |
51 |
gentoo-ops |
52 |
forum-mods |