| 1 |
On Monday 22 June 2009 17:51:31 James wrote: |
| 2 |
> So, as a conclusion, you probably want to use ~ instead of >= in there |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> > as you apparently are running a mostly stable box (arch) instead of |
| 5 |
> > testing (~arch)? |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> This is my (mis)conception, although, as you have suggest, |
| 8 |
> there are (gentoo) cultural norms that do suggest |
| 9 |
> certain boolean operations should not be used, |
| 10 |
> in say for example, package.keywords? |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
That's more just a safeguard against forgetting you put it there than anything |
| 13 |
else :-) |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
The vast majority of cases will use only the "=" operator or nothing. That's |
| 16 |
so you unmask the one version you are interested in, not everything from here |
| 17 |
on out, including every buggy, pre-release and just plain broken version that |
| 18 |
happens to have an ebuild. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
The use-case for no operator is mostly for the case where you run say a stable |
| 21 |
box, and want the latest of a specific well-known package. You might want the |
| 22 |
latest Qt for example. Another example is -svn ebuilds - enlightenment is a |
| 23 |
case in point. The snapshots are always out of date, latest svn is pretty |
| 24 |
stable, so one must unmask everything to get the -9999 versions |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
-- |
| 27 |
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com |
Archives