-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Torsten Veller wrote: > Some time ago (31 Oct 2008) I renamed > perl-core/File-Spec-3.2701 to perl-core/File-Spec-3.27.01 > by adding the new file and removing the other. > > I expected portage to do an downgrade. > > It didn't. > > I realised it when i got this bug <https://bugs.gentoo.org/248178> > and after joining #-portage I add a mask for a non-existing package to > package.mask. > > Today I was CC'ed to https://bugs.gentoo.org/105016 because "package.mask > contains invalid entries". > > In the meantime another bug was filed about portage "doesn't attempt to > downgrade packages on keyword changes..." <https://bugs.gentoo.org/252167> > with a fix. > > > I am confused. Will portage warn about the downgrade now and forever?
Yes, my intention is for the masks to be unnecessary, because after thinking about it I decided that it's not desirable to maintain package.mask entries for packages such as these. Since bug 252167 has been fixed, newer versions of portage perform automatic downgrades like older versions of portage did. - -- Thanks, Zac -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAklZK+YACgkQ/ejvha5XGaOYegCgvjU4KSjBE4/Lyr0LBvf+lcfY 624AoJoBzlpVGaKGOHr3C2gAtD9jUFfr =Z1t7 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----