| 1 |
* David W Noon <dwnoon@××××××××.com> [120328 11:22]: |
| 2 |
> On Wed, 28 Mar 2012 15:58:00 +0100, Neil Bothwick wrote about Re: |
| 3 |
> [gentoo-user] Anyone Else "Ping-Ponging" with fltk?: |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
> > On Wed, 28 Mar 2012 10:15:19 -0400, Todd Goodman wrote: |
| 6 |
> [snip] |
| 7 |
> > > Or have I broken my system? |
| 8 |
> > |
| 9 |
> > Probably. There is rarely a good reason for having libraries in world. |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> For us programmers it is often essential that we have one or more |
| 12 |
> library packages in world, since we might be using that library (or |
| 13 |
> those libraries) in projects we are developing. |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> The question I think Todd Goodman is trying to ask is why a package in |
| 16 |
> world should be a candidate for depclean. |
| 17 |
> -- |
| 18 |
> Regards, |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Dave [RLU #314465] |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
Yes, exactly. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
And more specifically, if the two versions of fltk are slotted it makes |
| 25 |
me even more surprised that portage wants to depclean the 1.3.0 version. |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Thanks, |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Todd |
Archives