Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Ciaran McCreesh <ciaranm@×××××××.org>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Portage local package revisions
Date: Sat, 21 Oct 2006 13:39:30
Message-Id: 20061021143408.3eedb648@snowdrop.home
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Portage local package revisions by Philip Walls
1 On Sat, 21 Oct 2006 12:51:19 +0000 Philip Walls <malverian@g.o>
2 wrote:
3 | This argument here can also be applied to the -r#.# solution you
4 | mentioned, so I think the decision between -r#.# and -local# is really
5 | just a matter of aesthetics. I'm on the fence as to which is best.
6
7 The -r#.#.#.# solution is cleaner IMO. With -local# you'd still need to
8 handle -local#.# or -local#-reallylocal-# to allow users to override
9 overlays that override the main repository.
10
11 --
12 Ciaran McCreesh
13 Mail : ciaranm at ciaranm.org
14 Web : http://ciaranm.org/
15 as-needed is broken : http://ciaranm.org/show_post.pl?post_id=13

Attachments

File name MIME type
signature.asc application/pgp-signature

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Portage local package revisions Philip Walls <malverian@g.o>