| 1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
| 2 |
Hash: SHA256 |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On 24/03/14 21:33, Helmut Jarausch wrote: |
| 5 |
> What happens (and does it harm) if I use different combinations of |
| 6 |
> overlays at different times? |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
Generally speaking, I think it would be safer to remain with the |
| 9 |
packages that are provided through the normal portage tree |
| 10 |
(particularly for system-related packages) unless there is a specific |
| 11 |
reason you need to move to the non-official version (and have |
| 12 |
reasonable assurance/confidence that it will function correctly). |
| 13 |
|
| 14 |
The risk would be that the functionality provided by the superseded |
| 15 |
package is broken - in the case of eselect, setting and maintaining |
| 16 |
system-wide symlinks could be broken or (unlikely, but worst-case |
| 17 |
scenario) completely mangled. |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
As a general rule-of-thumb, I think it's good practise when adding |
| 20 |
overlays that replace system-critical packages to mask all packages |
| 21 |
from the overlay and selectively unmask those that you want. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
It all depends, really, on what you're trying to do and how confident |
| 24 |
you feel that the packages provided won't break the system. |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
> Many thanks for a "mini-tutorial" or reference to those, |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
http://wiki.gentoo.org/wiki/Overlay#Using_unsafe_overlays |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Hope this helps. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Cheers; |
| 33 |
- -- |
| 34 |
wraeth |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
GnuPG Fingerprint: |
| 37 |
D1FF 129E 77EF FD1F CEA4 |
| 38 |
F384 1989 6A1D E411 864C |
| 39 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
| 40 |
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux) |
| 41 |
Comment: Using GnuPG with Thunderbird - http://www.enigmail.net/ |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
iF4EAREIAAYFAlMwFA4ACgkQGYlqHeQRhkwpEwD/T3J+c6Vojy3+2iGHtpxAMgir |
| 44 |
ROaeU4t2OjFXlJJSB5oA/0cYw8TWlwtuWEeAIOGNY280xyiwpFFK7CjOk/+FDn4C |
| 45 |
=OpHQ |
| 46 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
Archives