Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Daniel Barkalow <barkalow@××××××××.org>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: anti-portage wreckage?
Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2007 05:49:11
Message-Id: Pine.LNX.4.64.0701030022020.20138@iabervon.org
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Re: anti-portage wreckage? by Neil Bothwick
1 On Tue, 2 Jan 2007, Neil Bothwick wrote:
2
3 > On Tue, 2 Jan 2007 01:50:27 -0500 (EST), Daniel Barkalow wrote:
4 >
5 > > I think it would be useful to have an ebuild thing for "upgrading to
6 > > this package from version {expression} requires the following steps",
7 > > such that the message will be displayed only if you're doing that, and
8 > > such that the upgrade will be masked if you're being conservative in
9 > > upgrading.
10 >
11 > It already does, with has_version. Look at the pkg_setup() part of the
12 > postfix ebuild for an example of this in use.
13
14 Perhaps it just needs to be more popular, or maybe it needs to understand
15 slots better (in order to be popular). I know that all of the kernels I
16 install tell me that support for devfs was removed long before the oldest
17 kernel available in portage as of when I installed the machine.
18
19 It also doesn't look like it's something where it would be able to choose
20 to upgrade postfix 2.2.10 to 2.2.10-r1 instead of to 2.3.5 because 2.3.5
21 would require help and 2.2.10-r1 is automatic.
22
23 -Daniel
24 *This .sig left intentionally blank*
25 --
26 gentoo-user@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] Re: anti-portage wreckage? Neil Bothwick <neil@××××××××××.uk>