Re: [gentoo-user] /etc/portage/profile vs. /etc/portage/make.profile

Johannes Rosenberger <gentoo@×××××.eu> [17-02-20 17:06]:
> On 20.02.2017 03:37, Meino.Cramer@×××.de wrote:
> > Hi,
> >
> > I am a little confused...
> >
> > In search for the reason my new root has no /etc/portage/profile
> > but an /etc/portage/make.profile on this documemnt:
> > https://dev.gentoo.org/~zmedico/portage/doc/man/portage.5.html
> > I found this ywo lines
> >
> > /etc/portage/make.profile/ or /etc/make.profile/
> >     site-specific overrides go in /etc/portage/profile/
> >
> > (My profile is set correctly)
> > Does this mean that make.profile is totally identical to
> > make.profile, but if you want site-specific overrides you need
> > to have profile instead of make.profile?
> >
> > Do I need to create /etc/portage/profile if it is not there?
> >
> > Nonetheless the listing below implies, that they are equivaltent.
> > Or ?
> >
> > Cheers
> > Meino
> make.profile is a symlink to your profile, so you shouldn't edit
> anything in there. It is managed by 'eselect profile' and i guess that
> /etc/make.profile is the old location, like with make.conf which used to
> be in /etc but is now in /etc/portage.
> If you want to manually override anything in your profile that is not
> covered by the other files in /etc/portage, e.g. unmask useflags, then
> you use /etc/portage/profile. Everything there has higher precedence
> than things in make.profile.
>

Hi Johannes,

...I was irritated bu the header line of the linked article and the
fact, that /etc/portage/profile didn't exist in my installation.
I added the directory by hand and hope it is all ok now...

Thanks for your posting! :)

Cheers
Meino