378625 – CONFIG_PROTECT's behavior in gentoo prefix should be documented

Bug 378625 - CONFIG_PROTECT's behavior in gentoo prefix should be documented

Summary: CONFIG_PROTECT's behavior in gentoo prefix should be documented

Status:	RESOLVED FIXED

Alias:	None

Product:	Gentoo/Alt
Classification:	Unclassified
Component:	Prefix Support (show other bugs)
Hardware:	All Linux

Importance:	Normal trivial (vote)
Assignee:	Gentoo Prefix

URL:	http://git.overlays.gentoo.org/gitweb...
Whiteboard:
Keywords:

Depends on:
Blocks:

Reported:	2011-08-10 10:07 UTC by yegle
Modified:	2011-08-30 19:21 UTC (History)
CC List:	0 users

See Also:
Package list:
Runtime testing required:	---

Attachments
Add an attachment (proposed patch, testcase, etc.)

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.

Description yegle 2011-08-10 10:07:07 UTC

When you specifying CONFIG_PROTECT="/etc/some_customized_dir", you are actually protecting "${EPREFIX}/etc/some_customized_dir".

I think this should be documented or it may be confusing.

Reproducible: Always

Comment 1 Fabian Groffen gentoo-dev

2011-08-26 19:37:25 UTC

I've added some remarks about it in the man-pages.  Will be released with the next release of (Prefix) Portage.

Comment 2 Fabian Groffen gentoo-dev

2011-08-26 19:37:50 UTC

(yay, use new "in_progress" state)

Comment 3 Fabian Groffen gentoo-dev

2011-08-30 19:21:57 UTC

released in 2.2.01.19120