Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Gustavo Campos <gucampos@××××××××.br>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Accept all versions but 9999
Date: Fri, 14 Mar 2008 13:41:42
Message-Id: 19834d100803140641j6b95aef9q5874b76e3499dc45@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Accept all versions but 9999 by Alan McKinnon
1 Compile time =)
2
3 Actually when I ripped off package.unmask, the kde-4 tree just got
4 crazy, so I moved back only autounmask-kde-meta. After that,
5 alsa-driver, which was at -9999 wanted to go back to 1.0.15, that
6 doesn't compile (bug in bugs.gentoo), so I'm now compiling alsa
7 in-kernel, but ir pretty much seems to be working out (thinking about
8 an emerge -C `equery list | grep 9999 | xargs` now)...
9
10 Anyway, I believe I got planty of time, it's raining a f***ing lot
11 here and I'm not inclined to be on my way to the University ^^
12
13 On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 10:23 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com> wrote:
14 > On Friday 14 March 2008, Gustavo Campos wrote:
15 >
16 > > That's the way I did it before, you know... but it really comes to be
17 > > a pain in the ass when you want to test some new supercool releases
18 > > with tons of dependencies, such as kde-4 and so on.
19 >
20 > Tell me about it, been there done that, I feel your pain :-)
21 >
22 >
23 > > However that's some neat tip, I haven't though on the possibility of
24 > > leaving just package.keywords, I'm giving it a try just right now!
25 > > Thanks a lot!
26 >
27 > It was just an idea that came to me, completely untested. Let us know if
28 > it mostly works out.
29 >
30 >
31 >
32 >
33 >
34 > >
35 > > On Fri, Mar 14, 2008 at 4:14 AM, Alan McKinnon
36 > <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com> wrote:
37 > > > On Friday 14 March 2008, Gustavo Campos wrote:
38 > > > > Hi there.
39 > > > >
40 > > > > I have a "stable" system (I don't have ~x86 set), but I like to
41 > > > > have the latest versions of some specific software (kde, gnome,
42 > > > > amarok, alsa, pulseaudio, wine and so on). To achieve that, I've
43 > > > > been using autounmask with the parameter -n. When I have a
44 > > > > package I want to keep in the latest version, I just autounmask
45 > > > > -n package, so all the dependencies are unmasked and no version
46 > > > > number is appended.
47 > > > >
48 > > > > That works fine, but I like to have the latest released
49 > > > > versions, which means I usually want to get away from the *9999
50 > > > > ebuilds. The trouble is, when I use autounmask without version
51 > > > > numbers, those 9999 packages usually are choosen by portage, for
52 > > > > being the effective latest ones.
53 > > > >
54 > > > > I would like to know if there is a way for me to unmask
55 > > > > (automatically if possible) all versions BUT the 9999 ones, so I
56 > > > > have the latest releases but the less CVS/Beta packages as
57 > > > > possible.
58 > > >
59 > > > I find autounmask does way too much for me, and does it blindly
60 > > > just like a dumb computer should. so I do it manually. However, you
61 > > > are using -n and at the same time trying to use it without -n...
62 > > >
63 > > > Trying deleting the autounmask files in
64 > > > /etc/portage/package.unmask/, that should go a long way to removing
65 > > > the CVS stuff (which is usually hard masked) leaving just
66 > > > package.keywords. You might have to manually resolve some conflicts
67 > > > now and then though - small price
68 > > >
69 > > >
70 > > >
71 > > > --
72 > > > Alan McKinnon
73 > > > alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
74 > > >
75 > > > --
76 > > > gentoo-user@l.g.o mailing list
77 > >
78 > > --
79 > > Gustavo Campos
80 > >
81 > > Ciência da Computação / Computer Science - UFMG
82 >
83 >
84 >
85 > --
86 >
87 >
88 > Alan McKinnon
89 > alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com
90 >
91 > --
92 > gentoo-user@l.g.o mailing list
93 >
94 >
95
96
97
98 --
99 Gustavo Campos
100
101 Ciência da Computação / Computer Science - UFMG
102 --
103 gentoo-user@l.g.o mailing list