Gentoo Logo
Gentoo Spaceship




Note: Due to technical difficulties, the Archives are currently not up to date. GMANE provides an alternative service for most mailing lists.
c.f. bug 424647
List Archive: gentoo-dev
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Headers:
To: gentoo-dev@g.o
From: Maciej Mrozowski <reavertm@...>
Subject: Re: Re: Over using preserve_old_lib, don't do that
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 2010 21:23:40 +0200
On Thursday 15 of July 2010 16:24:08 Mike Auty wrote:
> On 15/07/10 14:57, Maciej Mrozowski wrote:
> > And what about using portage 2.2 and be done with it. I don't see the
> > point in reinventing the wheel yet again.
> 
> I'm using portage-2.2 and have been since it first came out.  I find the
> @set notation invaluable.

From my perspective sets notation is actually worthless and confusing (but 
that's another topic).
IIRC I've already spoke with portage team to think about making it emerge 
option instead or at least decouple it from sets semantics if possible (or it 
was about @live-rebuild? hmm). I think there are some preserved-related bugs 
(false positives) that need to be fixed first. Otherwise I'd welcome it being 
stable. I've already forgot what revdep-rebuild is thanks to portage-2.2

-- 
regards
MM


References:
Over using preserve_old_lib, don't do that
-- Samuli Suominen
Re: Re: Over using preserve_old_lib, don't do that
-- Maciej Mrozowski
Navigation:
Lists: gentoo-dev: < Prev By Thread Next > < Prev By Date Next >
Previous by thread:
Re: Over using preserve_old_lib, don't do that
Next by thread:
Re: Over using preserve_old_lib, don't do that
Previous by date:
Re: Over using preserve_old_lib, don't do that
Next by date:
Re: Re: bug wrangler queue is large...


Updated Jun 29, 2012

Summary: Archive of the gentoo-dev mailing list.

Donate to support our development efforts.

Copyright 2001-2013 Gentoo Foundation, Inc. Questions, Comments? Contact us.