| 1 |
At Mon, 17 Jul 2006 22:46:54 +0100 Mick <michaelkintzios@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On Monday 17 July 2006 22:29, Allan Gottlieb wrote: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>> I believe the suggested entry in package.keywords would have been |
| 6 |
>> |
| 7 |
>> ~dev-libs/ilbc-rfc3951-0 ~x86 |
| 8 |
>> |
| 9 |
>> (initial ~ instead of =) so that the specification includes version |
| 10 |
>> bumps (null --> -r1 --> -r2 ---> ...) |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Thank you Allan. Yes it could have been, but I set it with ' = ' so that it |
| 13 |
> would stay at the '0' version until masked as stable. I am trying to keep |
| 14 |
> this box as stable as possible. |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
That would happen with ~ as well. That is, it would stay at the -0 |
| 17 |
(rather than -1, -2, etc). The ~ just allows gentoo version bumps -0 |
| 18 |
to -0-r1 to -0-r2 etc. The trade-off is what happens when -0 is |
| 19 |
stable and -0-r1 becomes keyword masked. I prefer to go to -0-r1, but |
| 20 |
I can understand why you might want to stay at -0. Like you I want to |
| 21 |
keep my box as "stable" as possible and keep my package.keyword file |
| 22 |
small and restricted (= or ~). |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
allan |
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives