| 1 |
Daniel Troeder schrieb: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> I'm running testing GNOME on a "stable" system, with tesing |
| 4 |
> audio/video/gfx/xorg stuff. |
| 5 |
> Everything I consider "moving fast" is testing, the rest of the system |
| 6 |
> is stable. Works good for me. Just that I have to unmask more and more |
| 7 |
> base packages too, because they are a dependency of other unmasked |
| 8 |
> packages... |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
Yes, that's what I fear somehow. |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
> $ wc -l /etc/portage/package.* |
| 13 |
> 593 /etc/portage/package.keywords |
| 14 |
> 2 /etc/portage/package.mask |
| 15 |
> 32 /etc/portage/package.unmask |
| 16 |
> 23 /etc/portage/package.use |
| 17 |
> 650 total |
| 18 |
> |
| 19 |
> (cleaned number after checking for comments with |
| 20 |
> $ egrep '^#' /etc/portage/package.* |
| 21 |
> ) |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> $ eix -I --only-names | wc -l |
| 24 |
> 1194 |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> Well... I wouldn't call a system with 50% testing packages officially |
| 27 |
> "stable" - though it is. :D |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
;-) |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Any way to share a meaningful list of gnome-related pkgs to |
| 32 |
unmask/keyword? Just for starting off here .... |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
Thanks, Stefan |
Archives