On 02/13/2012 08:16 AM, Sergei Trofimovich wrote: > Another alternative would be to skip double-inclusion of identical profiles at > the portage level, but it sounds very fragile and counterintuitive. > > Maybe, a bit less fragile, than current state.
Either way is prone to unintended results, so it's better to fix the root problem which is poor profile structuring. If we did skip the double-inclusions automatically, then that would be a PMS change, and I doubt that any of the PMS folks would be in favor of it. -- Thanks, Zac
