| 1 |
Le mardi 24 février 2009 à 09:47 -0800, Brian Harring a écrit : |
| 2 |
> On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 11:26:48PM -0800, Donnie Berkholz wrote: |
| 3 |
> > This is your friendly reminder! Same bat time (typically the 2nd & 4th |
| 4 |
> > Thursdays at 2000 UTC / 1600 EST), same bat channel (#gentoo-council @ |
| 5 |
> > irc.freenode.net) ! |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Informal request, but it would be useful to get an idea of the |
| 8 |
> councils views on portage overlay compatibility issues. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Specifically, when it comes to gentoo repositories, there is one, and |
| 11 |
> only one definition of what that is- pms's repo spec. The problem |
| 12 |
> here is that the only repository truly conformant to that spec is |
| 13 |
> gentoo-x86, for the rest of the repositories (overlays realistically) |
| 14 |
> whatever portage supports seems to be the eventual standard they grow |
| 15 |
> towards. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> Problem with this is that there is *zero* way to spot these non-pms |
| 18 |
> repositories as it stands. Simplest example, under portage overlays |
| 19 |
> can unmask pkgs globally (gnome overlay reverting masks in |
| 20 |
> gentoo-x86), |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
I reply here as part of the gnome herd and partly responsible for the |
| 23 |
mask reverting in the overlay. I didn't know something used in |
| 24 |
gentoo-x86 couldn't be used in an overlay. Could you point me to the |
| 25 |
PMS section that treat this ? |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Gilles Dartiguelongue <eva@g.o> |
| 29 |
Gentoo |
Archives