| 1 |
On Mon, Jun 30, 2014 at 12:38 PM, William Hubbs <williamh@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> All, |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> Rich Freeman asked, in another thread, for specific examples of old |
| 5 |
> package.mask entries that just have "masked for testing" as the |
| 6 |
> description. |
| 7 |
> |
| 8 |
> Here is what I found with a quick look through package.mask. These |
| 9 |
> should be cleaned up by either 1) removing the mask or 2) booting the |
| 10 |
> affected packages or versions from the tree. |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
Or 3) Improve the mask message. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
For example, I think the major reason for the sys-libs/db mask is a |
| 16 |
weird licensing issue. It's still nice to have it in the tree. |
Archives