Gentoo Websites Logo
Go to: Gentoo Home Documentation Forums Lists Bugs Planet Store Wiki Get Gentoo!
Bug 323419 - app-doc/pms-99999999 unnecessarily dual-masked
Summary: app-doc/pms-99999999 unnecessarily dual-masked
Status: RESOLVED FIXED
Alias: None
Product: Gentoo Linux
Classification: Unclassified
Component: New packages (show other bugs)
Hardware: All Linux
: High trivial
Assignee: Thomas Anderson (tanderson) (RETIRED)
URL:
Whiteboard:
Keywords:
Depends on:
Blocks:
 
Reported: 2010-06-10 12:49 UTC by Michał Górny
Modified: 2010-06-11 13:48 UTC (History)
3 users (show)

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


Attachments

Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.
Description Michał Górny archtester Gentoo Infrastructure gentoo-dev Security 2010-06-10 12:49:23 UTC
Currently, the app-doc/pms live ebuild is dual-masked -- through empty KEYWORDS and package.mask. It is totally unnecessary to use the two mask forms at once, especially that it makes unmasking pretty irritating. Thus, I suggest to drop the package.mask entry, and keep masking live ebuilds with empty KEYWORDS.

Additionally, the ebuild PV may be shortened a little.
Comment 1 David Leverton 2010-06-10 17:47:10 UTC
(In reply to comment #0)
> Additionally, the ebuild PV may be shortened a little.
> 

The 99999999 was originally chosen in anticipation of having snapshots in yyyymmdd format, so as to always be the highest.  There haven't been any of those yet, though, only EAPI-tagged versions, so it might be OK to drop it down a bit.
Comment 2 Michał Górny archtester Gentoo Infrastructure gentoo-dev Security 2010-06-10 17:51:19 UTC
(In reply to comment #1)
> The 99999999 was originally chosen in anticipation of having snapshots in
> yyyymmdd format, so as to always be the highest.  There haven't been any of
> those yet, though, only EAPI-tagged versions, so it might be OK to drop it down
> a bit.

I think the current trend is to use PV like '2_pYYYYMMDD' for a snapshot.
Comment 3 Christian Faulhammer (RETIRED) gentoo-dev 2010-06-11 13:32:43 UTC
(In reply to comment #2)
> (In reply to comment #1)
> > The 99999999 was originally chosen in anticipation of having snapshots in
> > yyyymmdd format, so as to always be the highest.  There haven't been any of
> > those yet, though, only EAPI-tagged versions, so it might be OK to drop it down
> > a bit.
> 
> I think the current trend is to use PV like '2_pYYYYMMDD' for a snapshot.

 2_preYYYYMMDD would be better, but this is only a side-note.  Anyway, fine by me to loosen then masking and the version number.  Sorry, no commit access at the moment (see planet), although I sent a new SSH key over to infra today, so I should be ready sometime next week.
Comment 4 Ulrich Müller gentoo-dev 2010-06-11 13:48:41 UTC
Fixed, thanks.