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

I just picked a random reply here.  My $0.02 worth.  If I try to remove 
portage itself, I get this:

root@smoker / # emerge -Ca portage

 >>> These are the packages that would be unmerged:
 * Not unmerging package sys-apps/portage-2.2_rc61 since there is no valid
 * reason for portage to unmerge itself.

 >>> No packages selected for removal by unmerge
root@smoker / #

It appears you can't even remove portage at all.  Now call me silly, 
couldn't it be said that removing something that would prevent the 
package manager from working constitute a little warning?  After all, 
most likely the person is not thinking clearly that day and most likely 
doesn't REALLY want to do this.

Is there not a way to at the very least post a warning and then ask a 
'are you sure' question like it does with the -a option?

It's just that as a newbie ages ago, I did this too.  I didn't realize 
that it was a nasty boo boo until afterwards. 

< dale crawls back under his rock >

Dale

:-)  :-)