Bug 5754 – Feature request for myEbuilds and myPackage.mask

• Product: Portage Development
• Status: RESOLVED DUPLICATE

[Description Alexander Holler 2002-07-29 18:52:07 UTC]

Hello, 
 
I would find it very useful if emerge would use an additional subdirectory 
e.g. /usr/portage/myEbuilds and an additional package.mask e.g. 
/usr/portage/myEbuilds/myPackage.mask where a user could place his own ebuilds 
and an additional .mask file. The additional .mask file would enable the user 
to mask existing ebuilds, therefor emerge would use ebuilds find in myEbuilds. 
E.g. with that construct, I could place an ebuild cyrus-sasl-2.1.2.ebuild in 
myEbuilds/dev-libs/cyrus-sasl (or myEbuilds/cyrus-sasl) and would mask out all 
other versions. I would find this very handy, because now, I have to copy my 
ebuild(s) into the portage tree after every rsync (--clean). 
I don't need to mention, that myEbuilds an myPackage.mask should touched with 
rsync. ;) 
 
I think this shouldn't be much work, and would be a nice feature. 
 
Regards, 
 
Alexander

[Comment 1 Johannes Krause 2002-07-29 19:18:19 UTC]

Hi,

I think these ideas are very useful, and I have an additional suggestion:
A personal antimask file, where I can put package names of masked packages to
have them permanenty unmasked. This would be very useful if someone decides to
take part in long-time-testing a package that was masked because it had not
enough testing. I had this idea because I have to remove giFT out of the mask
after every rsync to check for an updated version.

jk

[Comment 2 Alexander Holler 2002-07-29 19:38:34 UTC]

I've just got another idea, maybe it would be useful if any ebuild in 
myEbuilds would allways prefered before any other ebuild in the normal 
portage. E.g. if I had an cyrus-sasl-2.1.2.ebuild in myEbuilds this should be 
allways used instead of any other version. It would be more flexible if emerge 
would use a subdirectory e.g. named myEbuilds/prefered and only ebuilds in 
that directory should prefered. 
 

[Comment 3 Daniel Robbins (RETIRED) 2002-07-29 23:58:56 UTC]

I'm using bug 5622 to track these requests.  We have local portage tree support
(beta) in Portage 2.0.21+. 

*** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of 5622 ***