1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
3 |
|
4 |
Hi everyone, |
5 |
|
6 |
At least a few people have expressed a desire to have support for a |
7 |
package.keywords file in the profiles [1] as a means to add or |
8 |
subtract any number values to or from the KEYWORDS that apply to a |
9 |
given ebuild. This would allow a specific profile to alter which |
10 |
packages are visible to consumers of a given keyword. This is useful |
11 |
for profiles that differ from other profiles in some significant way |
12 |
despite sharing the same values for stable and unstable keywords. |
13 |
For example, embedded profiles which use uclibc instead of glibc. |
14 |
|
15 |
An alternative solution for some cases might be to introduce |
16 |
additional keywords values, such as those suggested in GLEP 22 [2]. |
17 |
However, the package.keywords approach may provide greater |
18 |
simplicity and flexibility which would allow it to serve as a |
19 |
solution for a larger number of use cases. For example, the uclibc |
20 |
profiles would not have to maintain separate keywords for every |
21 |
single package. |
22 |
|
23 |
Since older versions of portage will simply ignore package.keywords |
24 |
files that may exist in a given profile, care should be taken not to |
25 |
use package.keywords in older profiles that are known to be used by |
26 |
older versions of portage. |
27 |
|
28 |
Does package.keywords seem like a good solution for the types of |
29 |
problems it's meant to solve? Would anybody like to discuss any |
30 |
alternative approaches? |
31 |
|
32 |
[1] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=55321 |
33 |
[2] http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/glep/glep-0022.html |
34 |
- -- |
35 |
Thanks, |
36 |
Zac |
37 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
38 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) |
39 |
|
40 |
iEYEARECAAYFAkiowSgACgkQ/ejvha5XGaPb7wCcCldP1W7KBC+h5Klbvo9ccAc8 |
41 |
NiMAn3pnk17jbEKQ5AZnJjKHNTTE4OP9 |
42 |
=0jTA |
43 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |