Gentoo Archives: gentoo-portage-dev

From: Philipp Riegger <lists@××××××××××××.de>
To: gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: 2.1 release candidate soon?
Date: Sat, 15 Apr 2006 11:12:37
Message-Id: 2698BF09-27F7-4F0F-A2F7-8CAE9E85A107@anderedomain.de
In Reply to: [gentoo-portage-dev] Re: 2.1 release candidate soon? by Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@cox.net>
1 On Apr 15, 2006, at 8:40 AM, Duncan wrote:
2
3 > Wouldn't the "help them out" default be consistent with the
4 > "non-interactive" goal for portage? Quit if there's no sane way to go
5 > forward without potentially breaking a system, but otherwise, use sane
6 > fallbacks where they are possible.
7
8 I don't think this is about interactive or non-interactive, it's more
9 about strict and non-strict. I think it would be nice to have the
10 "you want it but did not emerge it so i don't use it" with FEATUERS="-
11 strict" and the "sorry, not possible, i'll quit" with FEATURES="strict".
12
13 But i really think this is not about helping but about confusion. If
14 i post my emerge --info you don't know if i really use confcache even
15 if i have FEATURES="confcache", because emerge --info does not say if
16 i have emerged confcache and, if i have emerged it, which version it
17 is. I think this should also be listed in emerge --info.
18
19 Philipp
20 --
21 gentoo-portage-dev@g.o mailing list

Replies

Subject Author
[gentoo-portage-dev] Re: Re: 2.1 release candidate soon? Duncan <1i5t5.duncan@×××.net>