Alan McKinnon <[email protected]> writes: > Apparently, though unproven, at 19:13 on Thursday 28 October 2010, Jarry did > opine thusly: > >> Hi, >> how can I unmask (generally) certain M~ masked package and >> mask one particular version of that package? I want to use >> that package, but skip just one "x.y.z" upgrade, and continue >> with any future higher upgrades ("x.y.z+1"). [...] > portage is fighting you. > > unmask has priority over mask, so unmasking everything and masking a specific > version will not work - the first rule will prevail. > [example omitted] > > But this is fragile and will break way too often. What if you later also want > to mask version 7? portage doesn't give you a boolean AND or any way I know > of > to specify a range of versions. So you have to keep an eye on it manually, > and > tweak as necessary. Or you could just list exactly every version for which > there's an ebuild and add it to the appropriate package.* file > > This is a definite shortcoming in portage, it warrants a feature request at > b.g.o.
I'm (not yet?) needing this feature, and I'm not a portage developer, but while reading this thread I found myself wondering about ways to allow this mixing of mask and unmask - I'm sharing that in case it is useful. Feel free to ignore. - obey the more specific atom, this way unmasking the whole thing in .unmask and masking specific atoms in .mask would work. (When they're equally specific, use the current behavior.) This probably involves writing something to tell which atom is the more specific, unless that already exists. An advantage is that the current atom syntax doesn't need to be changed. - add regex support: this would allow exclusion on .unmask, but the syntax may not be the best, and it must ensure it doesn't break with existing atoms (there are atoms using asterisks and package versions have lots of stops) -- Nuno J. Silva gopher://sdf-eu.org/1/users/njsg
