On Fri, 2 Jan 2009 09:09:23 -0600, »Q« wrote: > > That's the point of this thread, the ebuild does perform a test before > > installation, but goes ahead straight after the warning. > > AFAIAC, the post-install log is exactly where the message belongs -- > that's where I'd look if I'd broken my system.
Would it be better if your system wasn't broken? > The fact that I don't > think portage should prevent people from installing stuff doesn't mean > I think there shouldn't be any information about what they've just > installed. There is another option,and it's already used in other ebuilds. Warn and abort emerging that package unless the user has specified that it should be installed. > But you snipped without comment what I think was a better idea, just > making the 177.x series no longer be an upgrade to the 173.x series. Making different packages is one idea, but will still cause problems in the future. The latest package,whatever you name it, would be the correct one for7/8/9xxx cards,but at some time it would drop support for 7xxx cards. Maybe a better option would be a make.conf variable, like NVIDIA_VIDEO_CARD, that ebuilds would respect in deciding which versionto use. -- Neil Bothwick The trouble with doing something right the first time is that nobody appreciates how difficult it was.
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
