Donnie Berkholz wrote:
On Sat, 2005-01-15 at 00:34 +0100, Paul de Vrieze wrote:
On Saturday 15 January 2005 00:25, Alec wrote:
Well from a user point of view, those are my files, not portages. You
don't mess with /etc/portage/profile or /etc/make.conf. I remember
seeing a bug filed where someone had masked xfree and portage rewrote
his use file to have xorg there instead. He wasn't too happy to have
that happen ( and wondered wtf it was since he didn't recall a message
telling him that portage had fixed his profile ). I wasn't particularly
glad to see that happen either. You generally don't want portage to be
touching stuff like that ( CONFIG_PROTECT it by default perhaps. )
otherwise I could potentially file bugs in portage for doing dumb crap
to my profile settings. Why does portage have to 'automagically' fix
things like that?
Happened to me too indeed. I masked xfree to be sure, but was suggested to
change it into xorg by dispatch-conf
When a package name changes, portage changes your mask for you. xfree
was "moved" to xorg-x11.
I realize the logic behind it, I'm saying it's wrong ;) xorg and
xfree were essentially competing packages. People masked xfree at first
because they didn't want xorg, and it wouldn't make logical sense to
mask xorg just because xfree too was masked previously.
--
Alec Warner
Spartasoft Secretary ( spartasoft.msu.edu )
Junior Computer Science
Michigan State University
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
--
[email protected] mailing list
