1 |
On 25.1.2010 13.02, Dale wrote: |
2 |
> Petteri Räty wrote: |
3 |
>> On 01/25/2010 04:28 AM, Dale wrote: |
4 |
>>> Well put. I would agree that a simple warning should be given before |
5 |
>>> removing a system package or a package that system must have, especially |
6 |
>>> portage. |
7 |
>>> Maybe what portage needs is a reverse -n feature. Instead of adding |
8 |
>>> something to the world file, it removes a unwanted package from the |
9 |
>>> world file and then the user could use --depclean to remove that package |
10 |
>>> and its no longer needed friends. I assume this is doable. |
11 |
>>> |
12 |
>> |
13 |
>> You can already use --depclean for this. |
14 |
>> |
15 |
>> Regards, |
16 |
>> Petteri |
17 |
>> |
18 |
> |
19 |
> So there is already a option that is the reverse of -n ? |
20 |
> |
21 |
> Dale |
22 |
> |
23 |
> :-) :-) |
24 |
|
25 |
|
26 |
You would first have to define the reverse to avoid misunderstanding. |
27 |
|
28 |
--noreplace (-n) |
29 |
Skips the packages specified on the command-line that |
30 |
have already been installed. |
31 |
|
32 |
Reverse: Install packages that are not already installed |
33 |
|
34 |
- This is what Portage does by default |
35 |
|
36 |
Reverse: Skips packages that are not installed |
37 |
|
38 |
- Makes no sense with installation actions. Is this what you mean? |
39 |
|
40 |
pena betelgeuse # emerge --depclean foobar |
41 |
>>> No packages selected for removal by depclean |
42 |
|
43 |
Regards, |
44 |
Petteri |