On Sun, Nov 21, 2010 at 01:00:03PM -0600, Ryan Hill wrote: > On Sun, 21 Nov 2010 13:11:53 +0000 > Markos Chandras <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Users interpret this as a 'double masking' which in fact it is since > > they need to touch two files before they are able to use the package. > > Isn't that the point? People should be discouraged in every way not to use > live ebuilds. I'd add a third if we had one. :) > > But yes, if I had to pick only one I'd go with dropping keywords over > package.mask. In fact it looks like I have some live ebuilds in the tree > that do exactly that. > Actually not. Users are already familiar with the -9999 concept so there is no point to add extra obstacles in their way. I am trying to find out corner cases where double masking makes sense. Otherwise it makes no sense to me. Actually the majority of users get confused when a package is double masked. Just drop by forums etc and you will see :)
-- Markos Chandras (hwoarang) Gentoo Linux Developer Web: http://hwoarang.silverarrow.org Key ID: 441AC410 Key FP: AAD0 8591 E3CD 445D 6411 3477 F7F7 1E8E 441A C410
pgppderna1BFI.pgp
Description: PGP signature
