Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-core] 2004.3 - Portage snapshot
Date: Mon, 27 Sep 2004 21:37:11
Message-Id: pan.2004.09.27.21.37.00.888143@cox.net
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] Re: [gentoo-core] 2004.3 - Portage snapshot by Nicholas Jones
1 Nicholas Jones posted <20040927192503.GA10789@××××××.net>, excerpted
2 below, on Mon, 27 Sep 2004 15:25:03 -0400:
3
4 > /var/cache/edb/virtuals is gone. It's calculated from the tree.
5 > Users can affect portage via /etc/portage/virtuals, but it is
6 > probably not going to be used/needed by 99.9% of users.
7
8 Shouldn't that be /etc/portage/profile/virtuals? Based on various
9 comments, I created a place-holder file (as I did with all the
10 /etc/portage/* stuff, so I can find it when I need to use it) directly
11 under /etc/portage when I switched to .51, and portage squawked that said
12 location was depreciated, listing profiles/virtuals as the new location.
13 The current .51 questions/comments thread says that should be profile
14 (singular) not profiles.
15
16 --
17 Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs.
18 "They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little
19 temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." --
20 Benjamin Franklin
21
22
23
24 --
25 gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
[gentoo-dev] /etc/portage clarification Nicholas Jones <carpaski@g.o>