Hey guys,

I have some questions about sets:
1) Sets are just files with one package per line in /usr/portage/sets,
right?

2) Can a set be included in the world file?
3) With set files in /usr/portage/sets and running "emerge -u @foo"
portage yields that @foo isn't a valid package atom, any idea why this is?


Thanks for any help :-)

--
Zeerak

Zeerak Waseem writes:

> I have some questions about sets:
> 1) Sets are just files with one package per line in /usr/portage/sets,
> right?

I think it's /etc/portage/sets instead. And there are also meta-sets like
system, world, module-rebuild, preserved-rebuild and more, defined in
/usr/share/portage/config/sets.conf. There is a little documentation in
the emerge man page, but I have no idea where else sets are documented.

> 2) Can a set be included in the world file?

I don't think so, sets go into /var/lib/portage/world_sets.

> 3) With set files in /usr/portage/sets and running "emerge -u @foo"
> portage yields that @foo isn't a valid package atom, any idea why this
> is?

Your portage is too old? In case of an error, you should get an "emerge:
There are no sets to satisfy 'foo'" message, and a list of known sets.

Wonko

On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 18:41:35 +0100, Alex Schuster <wonko@wonkology.org>
wrote:



Zeerak Waseem writes:


I have some questions about sets:
1) Sets are just files with one package per line in /usr/portage/sets,
right?


I think it's /etc/portage/sets instead. And there are also meta-sets like
system, world, module-rebuild, preserved-rebuild and more, defined in
/usr/share/portage/config/sets.conf. There is a little documentation in
the emerge man page, but I have no idea where else sets are documented.


2) Can a set be included in the world file?


I don't think so, sets go into /var/lib/portage/world_sets.


3) With set files in /usr/portage/sets and running "emerge -u @foo"
portage yields that @foo isn't a valid package atom, any idea why this
is?


Your portage is too old? In case of an error, you should get an "emerge:
There are no sets to satisfy 'foo'" message, and a list of known sets.

Wonko



Ah well, having the sets in the wrong place would give me an error.
And regarding portage version, weren't sets included in v. 2.x.x? My
portage version is 2.1.7.16, anything above seems to be hardmasked...


--
Zeerak

On Tue, 05 Jan 2010 18:53:13 +0100, Zeerak Waseem wrote:

> >> 3) With set files in /usr/portage/sets and running "emerge -u @foo"
> >> portage yields that @foo isn't a valid package atom, any idea why
> >> this is?
> >
> > Your portage is too old? In case of an error, you should get an
> > "emerge: There are no sets to satisfy 'foo'" message, and a list of
> > known sets.

> Ah well, having the sets in the wrong place would give me an error.

Yes, but that would be a "set not found" error, not a "WTF is this
@" error.

> And regarding portage version, weren't sets included in v. 2.x.x? My
> portage version is 2.1.7.16, anything above seems to be hardmasked...

Sets need portage 2.2, you'll have to unmask it.


--
Neil Bothwick

Q: How many builders does it take to change a light bulb?
A: "If only it was just the light bulb......we'll have to replace the
ceiling and..........."

On 1/5/2010 12:53 PM, Zeerak Waseem wrote:


Ah well, having the sets in the wrong place would give me an error.
And regarding portage version, weren't sets included in v. 2.x.x? My
portage version is 2.1.7.16, anything above seems to be hardmasked...


No, sets appear starting in portage v2.2. And yes, the whole 2.2 series
is hard-masked. The stated reason is so that the 2.1 test versions will
actually get some testing.


Opinions over precisely how silly it is to test old, being-obsoleted
versions in deference to new, enhanced versions vary and can be found in
the list archives.


Most unstable users have probably unmasked sys-apps/portage long ago and
moved into the future.


--Mike

Mike Edenfield wrote:

On 1/5/2010 12:53 PM, Zeerak Waseem wrote:


Ah well, having the sets in the wrong place would give me an error.
And regarding portage version, weren't sets included in v. 2.x.x? My
portage version is 2.1.7.16, anything above seems to be hardmasked...


No, sets appear starting in portage v2.2. And yes, the whole 2.2
series is hard-masked. The stated reason is so that the 2.1 test
versions will actually get some testing.


Opinions over precisely how silly it is to test old, being-obsoleted
versions in deference to new, enhanced versions vary and can be found
in the list archives.


Most unstable users have probably unmasked sys-apps/portage long ago
and moved into the future.


--Mike




I'll second that. I'm using portage-2.2_rc61 and it has been working
fine. If you want, you could always unmask that specific version. I
just unmask and keyword portage and so far, I haven't had any portage
problems. I do get the latest features tho. ;-)


Dale

:-) :-)

On Tue, 5 Jan 2010 18:41:35 +0100
Alex Schuster <wonko@wonkology.org> wrote:

> Zeerak Waseem writes:
>
> > I have some questions about sets:
> > 1) Sets are just files with one package per line in /usr/portage/sets,
> > right?
>

There are other kind of sets, for example, dynamic ones, from the
output of a given command, which allow you to do things like preserving
N last slots of package (gcc, kernel, etc) or creating your own
dependency trees. Important file here is /etc/portage/sets.conf.


> I think it's /etc/portage/sets instead. And there are also meta-sets like
> system, world, module-rebuild, preserved-rebuild and more, defined in
> /usr/share/portage/config/sets.conf. There is a little documentation in
> the emerge man page, but I have no idea where else sets are documented.

It's all documented in html pages, which will be installed if you'll
emerge portage with USE=doc, just look at the
/usr/share/doc/portage-2.2*/html/index.html


> > 2) Can a set be included in the world file?
>
> I don't think so, sets go into /var/lib/portage/world_sets.
>
> > 3) With set files in /usr/portage/sets and running "emerge -u @foo"
> > portage yields that @foo isn't a valid package atom, any idea why this
> > is?
>
> Your portage is too old? In case of an error, you should get an "emerge:
> There are no sets to satisfy 'foo'" message, and a list of known sets.
>
> Wonko
>

--
Mike Kazantsev // fraggod.net