On Thu, 27 Dec 2012 12:41:08 -0800 Zac Medico <zmed...@gentoo.org> wrote:
> On 12/27/2012 05:37 AM, Michał Górny wrote: > > EAPI 5 provides use.stable.mask files to solve this but those files > > require profiles to be EAPI 5. Therefore, in order to be able to use it > > we would have to actually break the update path for older portage > > versions completely. > > So, adding new profiles and deprecating the old ones is considered to > "break the update path for older versions"? I don't a problem with > deprecating profiles and forcing users to switch. The only manual labor > involved could be `emerge -1 portage && eselect profile set <target>`. No, breaking the update path was about going EAPI=5 in the base profiles. But at some point I think we'd deprecate and remove the old profiles anyway. -- Best regards, Michał Górny
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
