-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Patrick Lauer wrote:
> The only issue I have found with this idea relates to eclasses - overriding 
> in-tree eclasses to be precise. The problem there is that it invalidates in-
> tree metadata and potentially affects other overlays too. So that's a bit of 
> a 
> bummer, but then I wonder how common that case is.

It seems like it should only be a problem for people who use
eclass-overrides in /etc/portage/repos.conf [1] (this is not
default). People who do that are on their own anyway, because that's
what triggers bug #124041 [2].

In the absence of eclass-overrides in /etc/portage/repos.conf,
everything should be fine. Any eclasses that are intended to be
shared between repos can be configured by those repos via
layout.conf [3]. This allows for consistent distribution of metadata
cache, which also allows for consistent repoman results as discussed
in the "QA Overlay Layout support" thread [4].

[1]
http://dev.gentoo.org/~zmedico/portage/doc/man/portage.5.html#repos.conf
[2] http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=124041
[3] http://blogs.gentoo.org/zmedico/2009/04/20/overlay_layout_conf
[4]
http://archives.gentoo.org/gentoo-dev/msg_33c61550b4ed2b7b25dd5a4110e1ec81.xml

- --
Thanks,
Zac
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.11 (GNU/Linux)

iEYEARECAAYFAko9J2YACgkQ/ejvha5XGaPIaQCgq4fCUtdsusIMEjtS6XbXYPzb
ZKoAn3SWop6OFLJQNm+9ZOcwyLM9dehE
=hqgh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Reply via email to