| 1 |
Mike Auty wrote: |
| 2 |
> Yeah, |
| 3 |
> I agree that the updates should only affect that individual tree. |
| 4 |
> Whilst I can imagine cases where a move in the main tree should affect |
| 5 |
> overlay trees (such as recategorizing some net-misc ebuilds into a |
| 6 |
> net-proxy category), that could at least be emulated with a per-tree |
| 7 |
> move directive fairly easily. |
| 8 |
> It sounds as though the answer is that there currently no way to do |
| 9 |
> these kinds of moves, so what's the next step? Should I try and hack up |
| 10 |
> a version to deal with updates on a per tree basis? Is it actively |
| 11 |
> being developed and I'm just unaware of it? What can I do to help get |
| 12 |
> this feature into a future version of portage? It would be very useful |
| 13 |
> to have, because at the moment network administrator's can't quite use |
| 14 |
> overlays as a software management mechanism... |
| 15 |
> Thanks for you time, |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
As currently vdb/pkgdir don't track the repo where a package comes from |
| 18 |
it's not possible to do it in a proper way (those are affected by moves, |
| 19 |
not the repositories themselves). |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Marius |
| 22 |
-- |
| 23 |
gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives