| 1 |
Dnia 2013-07-22, o godz. 00:16:31 |
| 2 |
hasufell <hasufell@g.o> napisał(a): |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On 07/22/2013 12:07 AM, Duncan wrote: |
| 5 |
> > hasufell posted on Sun, 21 Jul 2013 17:22:24 +0200 as excerpted: |
| 6 |
> > |
| 7 |
> >> solution: Treeclean it and maintain it in an overlay (maybe |
| 8 |
> >> science-overlay). That's exactly what overlays are for... experimental |
| 9 |
> >> stuff. |
| 10 |
> > |
| 11 |
> > What's the pros/cons of overlay vs. in-tree-but-masked for something like |
| 12 |
> > this? In-tree-but-masked is at least available for those who want it, |
| 13 |
> > without having to load an overlay, but I don't see that discussed at all, |
| 14 |
> > here. |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> cons: |
| 18 |
> - users have to run "layman -a foo" ...I hope they will manage (and the |
| 19 |
> masking reason will be updated to explain where to look for googleearth |
| 20 |
> ebuilds) |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Then to get *a single package* they start using the whole overlay. If |
| 23 |
it's a sane overlay, fine. But some overlays really replace a lot of |
| 24 |
stuff silently and trigger failures we didn't even imagine before. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
Best regards, |
| 28 |
Michał Górny |
Archives