Summary: | portage has problems with comments in package.mask | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Portage Development | Reporter: | Stephan Friedrichs <deduktionstheorem> |
Component: | Core | Assignee: | Portage team <dev-portage> |
Status: | RESOLVED DUPLICATE | ||
Severity: | normal | ||
Priority: | High | ||
Version: | 2.1 | ||
Hardware: | x86 | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- |
Description
Stephan Friedrichs
2006-12-30 15:28:07 UTC
Your package.mask format is invalid, see man portage / package.mask
Format:
- comments begin with #
- one DEPEND atom per line
Example:
# mask out versions 1.0.4496 of the nvidia
# drivers and later
>=media-video/nvidia-kernel-1.0.4496
>=media-video/nvidia-glx-1.0.4496
Sorry, if I'm mistaken, but I did read this paragraph to check if it changed, but it was neither changed nor actually forbids comments after an atom, does it? Besides, the comment in that place was alright with yesterdays version of portage. And IMHO a comment in that place is quite usefull as well... (In reply to comment #2) > Besides, the comment in that place was alright with yesterdays version of > portage. I'm not sure why you observed that because the parser has never (in recent history) supported comments that don't start at the beginning of a line. >
> I'm not sure why you observed that because the parser has never (in recent
> history) supported comments that don't start at the beginning of a line.
>
That's weird... But I'm sure, I didn't add the comment within the last 24 hours. I wrote it the day glibc-2.5 moved into ~x86 wich was in October, I think...
So as it's no bug, I make it a proposal: Why should the parser not support comments after an atom? ;)
Because it's used for (much) more than just package.mask and a # after an atom isn't always a comment. It's a duplicate. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 141747 *** |