Zac Medico posted on Tue, 18 Dec 2012 09:58:42 -0800 as excerpted: > It's important to clarify that, because /etc/portage/sets (aka GLEP 21 > User Sets) has already been supported in stable portage since 2.1.11.9 > [1].
I didn't know that. Last I knew, stable portage had special-case acceptance of @system and @world to prepare the way, but I hadn't seen that full /etc/portage/sets/* and /var/lib/portage/world_sets support was stabilized. If indeed it is as you say, I've even more to rejoice about! =:^) And extended sets support... it'd be nice, but it's beyond the daily usage I so much depend on sets for, so personally, I see no big need for it, especially with all the extra complexity it'd bring. Just to clarify, tho, for those who could use 'em (I don't, but the gentooers I help on the various lists would likely find them useful): Are sets such as @live-rebuild and @module-rebuild available in stable, so I can start mentioning them, or are they part of the "advanced sets support" you mention as not yet stabilized? And... I thought I was already CCed on the bug (#235454) for this but apparently not. If sets support is stable already, gentoo-bashcomp could really use portage tab-completion for sets. =:^) https://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=235454 (Unfortunately I've yet to wrap my head around actually programming bash's programmable completion functionality or I'd likely post the patches. The bug had idled for near two years until I just CCed myself.) -- 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
