| 1 |
On Mon, 31 Aug 2015 22:33:58 +0300, Alexander Kapshuk wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> cat rubygems |
| 4 |
> >=dev-ruby/rubygems-2.2.5-r1 ruby_targets_ruby21 |
| 5 |
> >=virtual/rubygems-10 ruby_targets_ruby21 |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Is this format acceptable? Or should I have used two separate files, |
| 8 |
> one for 'dev-lang/rubygems', and another for 'virtual/rubygems'? |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Use whatever suits you, portage doesn't care whether you use one file for |
| 11 |
everything or one file for each setting. |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
My preference is to create a file for each program I use, and put the |
| 14 |
settings for dependent packages in there, that way I know what they |
| 15 |
relate to. It also means that if I remove the package, I can remove the |
| 16 |
file too. This to my mind is the key advantage of the separate file |
| 17 |
approach, a single file is too unwieldy without extensive comments, and I |
| 18 |
am too lazy to add useful comments. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
But it's up to you, do whatever works for your way of thinking - it's all |
| 21 |
the same to portage. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
One thing to be aware of is that portage adds "auto-unmask" entries to the |
| 24 |
"last" file in package.use, so I always create a zzz-auto-unmask file |
| 25 |
then transfer entries from there to the appropriate location. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
Neil Bothwick |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
*Libra*: /(Sept 23--Oct 23)/ An unfortunate typo on your application |
| 32 |
results in your being accepted into the Legion Of Superherpes. |
Archives