MIkey posted <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, excerpted below, on Sat, 04 Mar 2006 12:18:22 -0600:
> Ciaran McCreesh wrote: > >> On Sat, 04 Mar 2006 12:04:11 -0600 MIkey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> | At my job we aim to eventually rid ourselves completely of MS >> | products on several thousand (local and remote) desktops and replace >> | them with some sort of thin linux client running the citrix metaframe >> | client. They will be running in kiosk mode. No user will have the >> | ability to get to a window manager and browse around >> | in /usr/share/doc. They don't even know what the heck a man page is. >> >> Then you should use INSTALL_MASK, not a USE flag. > > Please excuse my ignorance, but what the heck is INSTALL_MASK and where is > it documented? Can it exclude things from being included in binary > packages? INSTALL_MASK is similar to the CONFIG_PROTECT and CONFIG_PROTECT_MASK portage variables in that it takes a list of directories (or files, wildcarding is acceptable), settable in make.conf. portage will still package those files in binary packages, but won't install anything that matches INSTALL_MASK. Thus, you can stick /usr/doc and /usr/share/doc in it, and snag anything that would be installed to them. -- Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. "Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman in http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/22/rms_interview.html -- gentoo-dev@gentoo.org mailing list
