On Saturday 30 September 2006 20:06, Diego 'Flameeyes' Pettenò wrote: > On Saturday 30 September 2006 19:39, Mike Frysinger wrote: > > isnt that the point of putting a comment above a mask ? > > # this package wont work on this profile > > bar/foo > > Indeed, but the problem is that the masks are all normalised in one big > mask. Which means that users might want to unmask certain versions found in > the top-level profile.mask, and also unmask some of the packages masked in > a profile.
i dont understand what you're trying to say here ... the behavior you're describing sounds correct to me ... provide some examples ? > > fbsd/packages:sys-freebsd/freebsd-mk-defs > > fbsd/package.mask:<nothing> > > fbsd/6.1/packages:<nothing> > > fbsd/6.1/package.mask:>=sys-freebsd/freebsd-mk-defs-6.2 > > fbsd/6.2/packages:<nothing> > > fbsd/6.2/package.mask:<nothing> > > Actually, you need to mask < versions, too ... sure ... not that people should be downgrading in the first place (glibc ebuilds prevent this), but you are correct > Note to Danny: releng controls default-linux, okay, but there are other > profiles than those, hardened and Gentoo/Alt. The decision should have been > taken by all the three of us, not unilaterally. there is no central body for profiles ... and more projects than just these three are affected -mike
pgp9ALIJgzB2L.pgp
Description: PGP signature
