| 1 |
On Mon, 9 Mar 2009 14:00:33 +0000 (UTC), James wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> > cat /etc/portage/sets/kde4.3 >>/etc/portage/package.keywords |
| 4 |
> > Or make package.keywordsa directory and simply put a copy of the sets |
| 5 |
> > file in there (or a symlink to the sets file). This is the more |
| 6 |
> > manageable option. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
> Interesting approach. I usually like to follow the gentoo recommended |
| 9 |
> practices. I get the feeling that "sets" via portage 2.2 is very |
| 10 |
> much a work in progress. So which of these approaches is likely |
| 11 |
> to become the de'facto method? |
| 12 |
|
| 13 |
The Gentoo approach has always been to handle package.keywords yourself, |
| 14 |
autounmask is an unofficial utility. I hope there will be the facility to |
| 15 |
add a set to the file in future. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> Also, I omitted the "~amd64" at the end of all of those manual |
| 18 |
> entries into my package.keywords file. It work without them. |
| 19 |
> So my question is the "-amd64" entry on every line of my |
| 20 |
> package.keywords deprecated now with portage 2.2? |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
It's always been like that (well, for a very long time, at least). If |
| 23 |
you don't specify an arch in the file, it uses the testing variant of |
| 24 |
whatever you have in make.conf. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Neil Bothwick |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Do you steal taglines too? |
Archives