Gentoo Archives: gentoo-portage-dev

From: Jason Stubbs <jstubbs@g.o>
To: gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: User created package lists
Date: Thu, 23 Mar 2006 15:08:41
Message-Id: 200603240007.48171.jstubbs@gentoo.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: User created package lists by Brian
1 On Thursday 23 March 2006 23:43, Brian wrote:
2 > On Thu, 2006-23-03 at 22:14 +0900, Jason Stubbs wrote:
3 > > On Thursday 23 March 2006 16:23, Brian wrote:
4 > > > /etc/portage/lists/userlist1
5 > > >
6 > > > format:
7 > > >
8 > > > net-www/apache
9 > > > www-apache/mod_perl
10 > > > ...
11 > >
12 > > If you make that "/etc/portage/sets" and support any package atom (rather
13 > > than only cat/pkg) then I you'd pretty much have what is planned (afaik).
14 > >
15 > > --
16 > > Jason Stubbs
17 >
18 >
19 > What about adding the other update config similar to package.keywords
20 >
21 > quoting me:
22 > Where updates could be one or more of "M" manual, "A" automatic, "N"
23 > never, "K" binary packages only. Also "L" for license
24 >
25 >
26 > these examples may not be normally sane to actually do. I'm not a
27 > server admin. They are just for demonstration
28 > eg.
29 >
30 > /etc/portage/sets/server
31 >
32 > =net-www/apache-2.* M,K # use my pre-built binaries only when I say
33 > www-servers/pound A # stay up to date
34 > ...
35 >
36 > /etc/portage/sets/games
37 >
38 > games-action/bombermaze
39 > games-action/descent3 L # automatically accept it's license
40
41
42 It seems like too much overloading to me. L is done with ACCEPT_LICENSE.
43 K could be done with separate repositories (not overlays). M can already
44 be done with profiles/masking. I can understand your motivation in
45 tying parameters together, but I honestly think this is not the way to
46 go about it.
47
48 --
49 Jason Stubbs
50
51
52 --
53 gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list