On 10/20/10 04:06:52, Andy Wilkinson wrote: > I believe I know the answer to the question... the real question is, > how can I work around it? ;) > > I am running the development branch of www-client/chromium (currently > 8.0.552.0). As a result, I like the latest builds to always be > unmasked > when they are available. However, once in a while there is a bad > apple > in the bunch and I'd like to mask that atom specifically. 8.0.552.0 > is > one of those that I would like masked. > > What I'd like to do is: > > /etc/portage/package.unmask: > www-client/chromium > > /etc/portage/package.mask: > =www-client/chromium-8.0.552.0 > > This case shows that, in fact, the mask comes first, as the atom in > question is definitely unmasked in that scenario. I have tried > putting > either line into /etc/portage/profile/package.mask or .unmask, to no > effect. > > I know I could do this by putting noninclusive comparative statements > in > .unmask, ala: > > <www-client/chromium-8.0.552.0 > >www-client/chromium-8.0.552.0 > > But this seems somewhat clumsy to me. Does anyone know a trick to do > what I'm looking for? >
I usually comment out the line in package.unmask if I want the mask to be effective. A line in /etc/portage/package.unmask overrules a line in /etc/portage/package.mask . Helmut.
