| 1 |
Il 23/03/2018 10:48, Ulrich Mueller ha scritto: |
| 2 |
>>>>>> On Thu, 22 Mar 2018, Geaaru wrote: |
| 3 |
>> for both portage and your fork I think that could be interesting add |
| 4 |
>> an extension to PMS for define inside profiles or targets masking of |
| 5 |
>> packages of a particular repslository. Currently PMS doesn't permit |
| 6 |
>> this but have this feature could be help users to define our |
| 7 |
>> profiles under overlays. |
| 8 |
>> Something like this: |
| 9 |
>> sys-devel/gcc::gentoo |
| 10 |
> Conceptually that makes no sense. sys-devel/gcc is the name of an |
| 11 |
> upstream package, so what does it even mean to mask it in one |
| 12 |
> repository but not in another? If it's the same package, then it |
| 13 |
> should behave in the same way, regardless of the repository its ebuild |
| 14 |
> it hosted in (or the package being installed, in which case it is no |
| 15 |
> longer in an ebuild repository). |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> If it is a different package however, then it should have a different |
| 18 |
> name. |
| 19 |
Sorry to say it bluntly but this make no sense at all, even changing a |
| 20 |
USE flag make the package behave wildly differently. |
| 21 |
Once we agree that an upstream (complex enough) package may have |
| 22 |
different incarnations two ebuilds from different maintainers may please |
| 23 |
differently the user. |
| 24 |
I'm not sure this choice belong to profiles but not because same |
| 25 |
upstream correspond to same files on filesystem. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
> Ulrich |
Archives