On 10:34 Mon 10 Dec , Santiago M. Mola wrote: > On Dec 10, 2007 10:21 AM, Donnie Berkholz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 00:26 Mon 10 Dec , Robin H. Johnson wrote: > > > What I've got for my Xorg testing setup, is foo-9999-rX, with a number > > > of different -X values that I just select from via package.{un,}mask > > > while testing - this saves altering everything else in the tree to pick > > > some package that has a different name just to satisfy a branch (which > > > also requires lots of ${MY_PN} mockery for some packages. > > > You'd also need to put '!cat/pn-feat' in the base cat/pn package and > > > vice-versa. > > > > While we're getting a bit off the original topic here, it occurred to me > > that using SLOTs for this, in combination with various SLOT deps and > > SLOT blockers, might work. Then one could use a search tool that would > > display SLOTs to show you which branch you're getting. > > > > Too tricky. It would confuse package managers and would break the > meaning of SLOT. An use expanded SCM_BRANCH combined with use > dependencies makes more sense and, hopefully, would be something > manageable.
You've made these assertions about confusion and breakage, and I would like to understand the reasoning behind them. I don't understand how it would be different than any other SLOT, because they're already a string. USE_EXPAND doesn't allow for the possibility of multiple SLOTs installed at once, which is a feature I would like. Thanks, Donnie -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list