1 |
On 1/24/10, Benny Pedersen <me@××××.org> wrote: |
2 |
> |
3 |
> should not be marked as system ? |
4 |
> |
5 |
> it removes python-wrapper and this remove python link from |
6 |
> /usr/bin/python linked to /usr/bin/python-wrapper so all portage does |
7 |
> not work after this, but i solved it with a quickpkg from another host |
8 |
> |
9 |
> my dump question why is it not listed as a system pkg when it really |
10 |
> seems so important ? |
11 |
|
12 |
Nearly identical question was mulled over in a discussion last spring |
13 |
over at gentoo-user list. Scan for "ARGH I uninstalled python" in the |
14 |
archives if you are interested. |
15 |
|
16 |
IIRC there was a suggestion to make the system set dynamically grow to |
17 |
contain all of the required dependencies of the packages explicitly |
18 |
listed in the system set, but I'm not sure if it went anywhere. |
19 |
|
20 |
Anyways, the current contents of @system cause all kinds of surprises, |
21 |
for example to FEATURES="buildsyspkg" users who rely on the feature |
22 |
without realizing how small (and even "incomplete") @system actually |
23 |
is. |
24 |
|
25 |
-- |
26 |
Arttu V. |