Summary: | a wish: could portage respect symlinks, please? | ||
---|---|---|---|
Product: | Portage Development | Reporter: | Carsten Lohrke (RETIRED) <carlo> |
Component: | Enhancement/Feature Requests | Assignee: | Portage team <dev-portage> |
Status: | VERIFIED LATER | ||
Severity: | enhancement | ||
Priority: | High | ||
Version: | unspecified | ||
Hardware: | All | ||
OS: | Linux | ||
Whiteboard: | |||
Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- |
Description
Carsten Lohrke (RETIRED)
2003-12-03 16:00:43 UTC
Argh, not ( /usr/portage/_portage/some-category-dir -> /usr/portage/_portage/ ) but ( /usr/local/portage/some-category-dir -> /usr/local/_portage/ ) of course. Maybe I'm missing something, but why not set PORTDIR_OVERLAY in make.conf and not have symlinks at all? Yes Donnie, you're missing something. It _is_ my overlay directory. I want to flatten the overlay directory tree, without loosing compliance with the categorized tree structure of portage. Putting a hold on feature requests for portage as they are drowning out the bugs. Most of these features should be available in the next major version of portage. But for the time being, they are just drowning out the major bugs and delaying the next version's progress. Any bugs that contain patches and any bugs for etc-update or dispatch-conf can be reopened. Sorry, I'm just not good enough with bugzilla. ;) Uh, I have my scripts in place in between. Should have closed the bug long ago. |