On Wed, 25 Jan 2006 16:08:07 +0900 Jason Stubbs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: | > Uh, given that you can do that with old style virtuals, methinks | > that isn't the case... | | Only by modifying every ebuild that has a virtual/x11 dependency. The | atom "virtual/x11" cannot be limited to specific versions on its own | with old style virtuals.
Oh? There's at least one old style virtual that specifies a full dep atom rather than a package name. I know this because it broke my first virtuals parser that was expecting a straight name... | The premise for not doing this is that packages will never be fixed, | right? Why not make the modular X provide virtual/x11 and just | institute a policy that no new packages can go into stable with a | virtual/x11 dependency? It could even be easily enforcable if | necessary. Much more sensible. -- Ciaran McCreesh : Gentoo Developer (King of all Londinium) Mail : ciaranm at gentoo.org Web : http://dev.gentoo.org/~ciaranm
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
