On Sunday 02 April 2006 22:29, Simon Stelling wrote: > Come on. Is this a 'policy doesn't say I have to be sane' war? It's > absolutely reasonable to p.mask a package that is pending for removal. That > way you give the users a timeframe which they can search for alternative > tools in.
This is not the case. At least unless the user actively looks at package.mask. Since Portage doesn't provide the information, this point is void. And even if - four weeks are a too long, imho. Carsten
pgpnCZy5so6UC.pgp
Description: PGP signature
