On 16/01/2014 17:45, Gevisz wrote: >> Incidentally, there's nothing bad about installing that package's 9999 >> > version. It's masked because it's in the source repo (all >> > cvs/svn/git/etc sources are always masked so they don't get installed >> > accidentally). But keeping them current is a pain. > > Thank you for information, but so far I am trying to keep my system as > close to the main portage tree as possible and really afraid of any > masked packaged and even the packages from other overlays.
You're being overly cautious to your own detriment. Handbrake is almost permanently keyworded, I can't recall a time when a version was ever marked stable. This is unrelated to code quality, it's likely to be simply manpower (a huge thread is happening right now on -dev on this very subject). Handbrake works and works well. You get the same as what you'd get if you installed it direct from the project site (or if you ran it on MacOS). It's an app, nothing consumes it so it either works or it doesn't. If we were discussing say dbus or apache&php putting latest unstable package on an otherwise stable system you would indeed have a very valid point. But this is not the case here. If ~arch handbrake needs to update some other lib to ~arch, it won't work emerge and you'll get a very verbose message saying why. Then you can make an informed decision. -- Alan McKinnon alan.mckin...@gmail.com
