| 1 |
Well frankly, wouldn't a second to a second be a third? Therefore I |
| 2 |
hearby 'fourth' that measure. :) |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
On Fri, 2002-05-31 at 18:02, Miguel S. Filipe wrote: |
| 5 |
> Jean-Michel Smith wrote: |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> >On Thursday 30 May 2002 05:57 am, Dan Naumov wrote: |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > |
| 10 |
> >>Hey. |
| 11 |
> >> |
| 12 |
> >>I would like to know whether some kind of reverse-dependency support is |
| 13 |
> >>going to be included in Portage2. It would be nice if in case of |
| 14 |
> >>unmerging a package, Portage would let the user know whether some |
| 15 |
> >>installed packages need it and if so, what packages do. |
| 16 |
> >> |
| 17 |
> >> |
| 18 |
> > |
| 19 |
> >I would second that feature request. It would also allow for some intelligent |
| 20 |
> >'auto-healing' of the system, by allowing one to (optionally) recompile any |
| 21 |
> >packages dependent on an ebuild that has just been upgraded so they run |
| 22 |
> >against the newest version or warning one before a package upon which others |
| 23 |
> >rely is removed. This is the one feature I miss most about Source Mage |
| 24 |
> >(sorcerer). |
| 25 |
> > |
| 26 |
> >Jean. |
| 27 |
> >_______________________________________________ |
| 28 |
> >gentoo-dev mailing list |
| 29 |
> >gentoo-dev@g.o |
| 30 |
> >http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev |
| 31 |
> > |
| 32 |
> > |
| 33 |
> > |
| 34 |
> Yes, that must be something that the next version of portage address. |
| 35 |
> I also second that feature request! |
| 36 |
> |
| 37 |
> |
| 38 |
> _______________________________________________ |
| 39 |
> gentoo-dev mailing list |
| 40 |
> gentoo-dev@g.o |
| 41 |
> http://lists.gentoo.org/mailman/listinfo/gentoo-dev |
| 42 |
> |
Archives