Gentoo Archives: gentoo-portage-dev

From: Joakim Tjernlund <Joakim.Tjernlund@××××××××.com>
To: "gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o" <gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o>, "ulm@g.o" <ulm@g.o>
Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] profile masking
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 2020 08:58:22
Message-Id: 830be1e31e9174d40579536033dfba90d04fa718.camel@infinera.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] profile masking by "Michał Górny"
1 On Fri, 2020-08-14 at 23:12 +0200, Michał Górny wrote:
2 > On Fri, 2020-08-14 at 15:42 +0000, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
3 > > On Fri, 2020-08-14 at 17:31 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote:
4 > > > > > > > > On Fri, 14 Aug 2020, Joakim Tjernlund wrote:
5 > > > > When pkgs are masked in the profile, it affects all variants of that
6 > > > > pkgs, even the ones that are in other overlays.
7 > > > > Example:
8 > > > > !!! The following installed packages are masked:
9 > > > > - sys-auth/sssd-9999::transmode (masked by: package.mask)
10 > > > > /usr/portage/profiles/package.mask:
11 > > > > # Matt Turner <mattst88@g.o> (2020-08-13)
12 > > > > # Masked for testing
13 > > > > My sssd-9999 is now masked.
14 > > > > Could the profile syntax be extended to include syntax allowed in
15 > > > > /etc/portage ? Then one could use the ::gentoo syntax (or so I hope)
16 > > >
17 > > > The :: syntax is Portage specific and doesn't exist in EAPI 7.
18 > > > So there's no chance to get it into the profile dir anytime soon
19 > > > (because that would imply :: to be added to a future EAPI and the
20 > > > top-level profile dir to be bumped to that EAPI).
21 > >
22 > > Is profile part of EAPI? masks are not defined/used in ebuilds directly.
23 > >
24 > > > You could override the mask in your overlay's profile/package.mask
25 > > > instead, using an entry with the "-" operator.
26 > >
27 > > Yes, I know I can add that in profile/package.mask but I am looking for the bigger
28 > > picture here. This has to stop somehow, there need to be something that limits
29 > > the mask scope to the repo/overlay it is defined.
30 > >
31 >
32 > Why is that?  I dare say the bigger picture needs to include different
33 > mask reasons.  Sure, 'masked for testing' may or may not make little
34 > sense for live ebuilds.  However, 'masked for security issues' may
35 > pretty apply to custom repo ebuilds as well.
36 >
37
38 Possibly, but the way you mask Test/Security should then be referring to specific versions,
39 not all possible versions in the universe.
40
41 Jocke