On Mon, 2004-01-12 at 16:38, Thomas T. Veldhouse wrote: > No, my concern is that a bunch of system packages may be upgraded as well to > "testing" version when doing this (maybe not for blender, but when using > ACCEPT_KEYWORDS="~x86"). I don't want the compiler, gettext, autoconf or > anything else upgraded from stable and if a package will work with the > stable version (even though it is itself a testing version), then it should > use them ... using the keyword change does not allow for this. OK I see you point now. However giving it a little thought I don't see how this could be fixed.
e.g. you wish to install blender. To do that you must install a masked version of gettext (just for e.g.). However *you* don't want to do that as you see it as unstable. So you are at an impasse. Do you compromise your systems stability for the additional functionality you require? What you have to assume is that the maintainer who decided that blender needed a masked version of gettext did so knowing this was a "true" dependancy. The only way you can find this out is by checking the ebuild docs or asking the maintainer directly. So your separation idea doesn't really make sense (at least not to me). I accept that perhaps system ebuilds should be marked as such when doing an emerge -p. This way the user can make a more informed decision about whether to install the ebuild or not. Perhaps make.conf could have a var that listed packages that the admin never wants to have a masked version of. Cheers -- Dg -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
