Gentoo Archives: gentoo-portage-dev

From: Marius Mauch <genone@g.o>
To: gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: Bugzilla Bug 112779: New and Improved Way to Handle /etc/portage
Date: Thu, 17 Nov 2005 08:28:16
Message-Id: 437C3187.5030202@gentoo.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: Bugzilla Bug 112779: New and Improved Way to Handle /etc/portage by Anthony Gorecki
1 Anthony Gorecki wrote:
2 > On Wednesday, November 16, 2005 23:12, Zac Medico wrote:
3 >
4 >>I wouldn't mind having a feature like this. I would provide a way for
5 >
6 > automatic unmasking tools to keep their changes separate and easily
7 > reversible.
8 >
9 > This seems to be borderlining on being unnecessary, in my opinion. A commented
10 > section in package.unmask could work just as easily, and it would likely save
11 > time for the user. "kde-base/kdelibs" is just as easy to find in a sorted,
12 > sectioned file as it is in multiple files:
13 >
14 > # GNOME Packages:
15 > [...]
16 >
17 > # KDE Packages:
18 > [...]
19
20 I think the point is more with a) temporary enabling/disabling of
21 sections and b) sharing sections. Having multiple files those situations
22 are a bit easier to handle.
23 Shouldn't be too hard offhand, basically
24 if isdir(foo):
25 for x in listdir(foo):
26 mylines.extend(grabfile(x))
27 else:
28 mylines = grabfile(foo)
29
30 Marius
31 --
32 gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list

Replies