On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 05:30:16PM -0800, Zac Medico wrote: > On 11/22/2010 09:09 AM, Zac Medico wrote: > > On 11/21/2010 09:54 PM, Ulrich Mueller wrote: > >>>>>>> On Sun, 21 Nov 2010, Alexis Ballier wrote: > >> > >>>> Also, for an ebuild with empty KEYWORDS, repoman will not indicate > >>>> any problems with dependencies. > >> > >>> by default with a p.mask it doesnt either. > >> > >> Yes, but it has an option to enable it, whereas there isn't such an > >> option for empty KEYWORDS. > > > > I suppose the repoman --without-mask option can be modified to act as if > > ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="**". > > Well, after looking into it, --without-mask isn't necessarily related. > Anyway, there's support for checking dependencies with empty KEYWORDS here: > > http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb/?p=proj/portage.git;a=commit;h=9ed6332f2015e41f072f897764f550c5574ea96f > -- > Thanks, > Zac >
Thank you. Like the fellow devs said before, KEYWORDS are there to indicate whether a package works for an arch or not. Empty keywords simply means "hey, this package is not tested in this arch" which is the exact point of a live ebuild. However, p.mask is for more severe issues which might not always apply on live ebuilds. p.mask entry should be *optional* not mandatory. Afterall, few of us use p.mask for live ebuilds. Why not make it official policy anyway? -- Markos Chandras (hwoarang) Gentoo Linux Developer Web: http://hwoarang.silverarrow.org Key ID: 441AC410 Key FP: AAD0 8591 E3CD 445D 6411 3477 F7F7 1E8E 441A C410
pgp3bYBOFu8L5.pgp
Description: PGP signature
