-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Brian Harring wrote:
> On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 12:38:39PM -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
>> I haven't seen a specification for use dependencies yet, so I'm not quite
>> sure how they'd work.
> cat/pkg-ver[use1,use2,-use3,use4]
> cat/pkg-ver[use]
> etc.
Oka
On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 12:38:39PM -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
> Brian Harring wrote:
> > On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 12:23:58PM -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
> >> Hi everyone,
> >>
> >> I've written a patch [1] that adds support for package.use.mask in the
> >> profile. It should behave exactly as use.mask
On Fri, Aug 04, 2006 at 08:20:22PM -0400, Alec Warner wrote:
>
> >Since you're sliding this in, why not slide it in using use dep
> >syntax?
> >
> >No, not going to fight over this not being in package.mask, what I'm
> >saying is this _is_ masking of a use dep atom, just use use dep syntax
> >i
Since you're sliding this in, why not slide it in using use dep
syntax?
No, not going to fight over this not being in package.mask, what I'm
saying is this _is_ masking of a use dep atom, just use use dep syntax
in the file instead.
If y'all get use deps, it'll be a bit simpler for folks t
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Brian Harring wrote:
> On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 12:23:58PM -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
>> Hi everyone,
>>
>> I've written a patch [1] that adds support for package.use.mask in the
>> profile. It should behave exactly as use.mask currently does except tha
On Thu, Aug 03, 2006 at 12:23:58PM -0700, Zac Medico wrote:
> Hi everyone,
>
> I've written a patch [1] that adds support for package.use.mask in the
> profile. It should behave exactly as use.mask currently does except that it
> allows USE flags to be masked for specific packages rather than f
Zac Medico wrote:
Shall we go ahead with the package.use.mask implementation or not?
Yes, please!
--
Kind Regards,
Simon Stelling
Gentoo/AMD64 Developer
--
gentoo-portage-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
