On Thu, 13 Aug 2009 17:32:56 +0000 (UTC) Mark Bateman <coul...@soon.com> wrote: > > It is not the business of PMS to enforce undocumented features that > > Portage supports only by accident and that aren't used in the tree. > > PMS doesn't depict just what portage should do, just what ebuild's in > the main tree are to expect.
PMS documents what ebuilds may or may not rely upon from the package manager. PMS, like the Portage document, says that package.mask is a file. > This is a good feature (intentional or not) of portage and is already > finding usage in overlays. And it shouldn't be until it's gone through the proper process to become a documented, controlled feature rather than an accident people are exploiting. Seriously, this isn't difficult to do. I get the impression people are only trying to avoid doing it properly here so they can establish a precedent of not doing things properly... -- Ciaran McCreesh
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
