Neil Bothwick <n...@digimed.co.uk> writes: > On Sun, 14 Mar 2010 22:34:41 -0500, Harry Putnam wrote: > >> Seriously, Do you know why emacs-24 is masked like that? >> >> What little I know of Ulrich Mueller is that he is quite a stalwart >> fellow and not much would get by him. I guess its just that its the >> cvs version eh? > > Yes, CVS ebuilds are generally masked as they are too good a means of > breaking things to be installed without manual unmasking. Copy the mask > line to /etc/portage/package.unmask/emacs to see if it breaks for you.
No, no apparent problems. But didn't we used to get `emacs-cvs' unmasked just with ~<ARCH>. Before it changed to emacs-vcs... I don't recall having to manually unmask it that way.
