many ebuilds have no default, -*, keyword which results in the user needing to specify the ebuild on bugzilla, then accept x86 or such as the keyword to emerge it.
this should not happen. the default -* should be assumed for all ebuilds. thus a non-x86 user should be able to specify -* for an ebuild to get a version even if -* does not appear in the ebuild.
there should be a keyword for "accept anyways" so amd64 users could emerge things without having to set the accepted keywords to x86.
This has nothing to with infrastructure, please read the instructions before filing bugs.
Definitely NO. -* means broken on all other arches not explicitly specified in the ebuild. This is definitely NOT a feature to make unmasking ebuilds easier. We need some QA/arch testing to actually keyword things for a particular arch.
Ok, well instead of marking it ivalid, why not move it to the correct sport in bugzilla. i see no more relevent place for this. given that the current solution is to accept a different arch...
maybe make a ?arch keyword for "untested". then people could "test" it... it seems like a poor choice to make "no keywords" trump hardmasking and "known unstable" in terms of emerging packages. at least with those there is a good solution to emerging the packages.
where do i re-file this gentoo portage system feature request?
(In reply to comment #3)
> where do i re-file this gentoo portage system feature request?
/dev/null will probably be a good place to start. ;)
Seriously - we are not interested in zillions of invalid bug reports filed by users just because they've had fun with automagic keywords that you are suggesting.
'man ekeyword' and 'man ebuild' (the digest part) are your friends if you wish to test ebuilds in a 'politically correct' way. Thanks.