Gentoo Archives: gentoo-portage-dev

From: Zac Medico <zmedico@×××××.com>
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: Tue, 22 Nov 2005 01:15:38
Message-Id: 4382710F.3010507@gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: Bugzilla Bug 112779: New and Improved Way to Handle /etc/portage by capitalista
1 capitalista wrote:
2 > I'd be happier if, pending you indeed went the source route, you'd
3 > source directories and not files. You could have another file that
4 > would contain info on the other directories, or maybe put in a
5 > variable in make.conf like PORTDIR_OVERLAY, creating
6 > /etc/portage/includes style functionality anywhere. Still, a source
7 > command just seems like more of a hassle than it needs to be for the
8 > end user.
9 >
10
11 I have created a slightly modified version of my previous patch that introduces an environment variable called USER_OVERRIDES (as a replacement for /etc/portage/includes). If USER_OVERRIDES is unset then it defaults to /etc/portage (traditional behavior). With this variable you can set a space separated list of directories (if you leave out /etc/portage then it will _not_ be included).
12
13 The functionality that this new USER_OVERRIDES variable introduces is somewhat like a "source" command, but it applies to directories (and is easier to implement). Directories listed later in the variable will override earlier ones.
14
15 Zac

Attachments

File name MIME type
user_overrides.patch text/x-patch

Replies