On Fri, 2020-08-14 at 17:31 +0200, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > > > > > > On Fri, 14 Aug 2020, Joakim Tjernlund wrote: > > > When pkgs are masked in the profile, it affects all variants of that > > pkgs, even the ones that are in other overlays. > > Example: > > !!! The following installed packages are masked: > > - sys-auth/sssd-9999::transmode (masked by: package.mask) > > /usr/portage/profiles/package.mask: > > # Matt Turner <matts...@gentoo.org> (2020-08-13) > > # Masked for testing > > > My sssd-9999 is now masked. > > > Could the profile syntax be extended to include syntax allowed in > > /etc/portage ? Then one could use the ::gentoo syntax (or so I hope) > > The :: syntax is Portage specific and doesn't exist in EAPI 7. > So there's no chance to get it into the profile dir anytime soon > (because that would imply :: to be added to a future EAPI and the > top-level profile dir to be bumped to that EAPI).
Is profile part of EAPI? masks are not defined/used in ebuilds directly. > > You could override the mask in your overlay's profile/package.mask > instead, using an entry with the "-" operator. Yes, I know I can add that in profile/package.mask but I am looking for the bigger picture here. This has to stop somehow, there need to be something that limits the mask scope to the repo/overlay it is defined. I think a good start would be to consider /etc/portage the top profile and other subprofiles should be able to use the same features as /etc/portage. Portage could start supporting that now, but there would be a while until one can use them in Gentoo profile. Meanwhile one should ban masks containing > and instead use exact revision of the package. Jocke
