| 1 |
Neil Bothwick schreef: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, 31 Aug 2005 13:39:04 +0200, Holly Bostick wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>>Or, if there's some way to 'modularize' mutt, you could look into |
| 6 |
>>turning the patch into a 'plugin' (if such things exist, I know nothing |
| 7 |
>>about mutt), so that it would be optional to those who wanted to use it. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> Or you could add a USE flag, so the patch was only applied for those who |
| 11 |
> want it. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
I thought of that, but since I don't know what the patch is or does, I |
| 15 |
didn't know if that would be appropriate. Though, come to think of it, |
| 16 |
if there's local USE flags like GAPING_SECURITY_HOLE (forgot what ebuild |
| 17 |
that's on, but saw it again yesterday during a light world update, makes |
| 18 |
me laugh), or -insecure-drivers, I suppose that the patch could have its |
| 19 |
own USE flag, no matter what it does. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
But do you know the answer to Nick's question about what I said earlier? |
| 22 |
In a 'conflict' between two ebuilds of the same name and version, one in |
| 23 |
Portage and one in the overlay, does the choice of which one is used if |
| 24 |
I emerge the relevant package rely on which one is most recent(ly |
| 25 |
modified), or the location-- i.e., will the overlay ebuild always beat |
| 26 |
the Portage ebuild even if the Portage build is newer (because it was |
| 27 |
updated without changing the version number), or will the newer ebuild |
| 28 |
always win out, whether it's in overlay or main Portage? |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
I think it's the latter, but I was tired when I wrote that, and offhand |
| 31 |
don't remember where to look it up to verify. |
| 32 |
|
| 33 |
Holly |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
-- |
| 37 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives