Look at this: # Nirbheek Chauhan <nirbheek@gentoo.org> (10 Jun 2009) # Several feature regressions that will make our users # go on a witchhunt if unmasked # * No XDMCP connection UI # * No configuration/theming support # * No support for auth backends other than PAM # * Many more... >=gnome-base/gdm-2.26 but according to http://projects.gnome.org/gdm/ The latest Stable version is 2.30.x Maybe we should to replace ">=gnome-base/gdm-2.26" by ">=gnome-base/gdm-2.30"? Maybe we shuold to remove this position? Reproducible: Always cat package.mask.patch *** /usr/portage/profiles/package.mask.prev 2011-05-04 23:06:53.000000000 +0400 --- /usr/portage/profiles/package.mask 2011-05-04 23:17:25.000000000 +0400 *************** *** 892,898 **** # * No configuration/theming support # * No support for auth backends other than PAM # * Many more... ! >=gnome-base/gdm-2.26 # Benedikt Böhm <hollow@gentoo.org> (19 Apr 2009) # masked for testing --- 892,898 ---- # * No configuration/theming support # * No support for auth backends other than PAM # * Many more... ! >=gnome-base/gdm-2.30 # Benedikt Böhm <hollow@gentoo.org> (19 Apr 2009) # masked for testing
Why we should change that? gdm started to have a lot of regressions since its 2.26 version in the tree (it was the first version with these problems to be added here), then, all versions from that one are affected by some regressions and, then, will be kept hardmasked for now, and there is no need to have to update mask entry periodically.
