1 |
Arttu V. wrote: |
2 |
> On 1/24/10, Benny Pedersen <me@××××.org> wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
>> should not be marked as system ? |
5 |
>> |
6 |
>> it removes python-wrapper and this remove python link from |
7 |
>> /usr/bin/python linked to /usr/bin/python-wrapper so all portage does |
8 |
>> not work after this, but i solved it with a quickpkg from another host |
9 |
>> |
10 |
>> my dump question why is it not listed as a system pkg when it really |
11 |
>> seems so important ? |
12 |
>> |
13 |
> |
14 |
> Nearly identical question was mulled over in a discussion last spring |
15 |
> over at gentoo-user list. Scan for "ARGH I uninstalled python" in the |
16 |
> archives if you are interested. |
17 |
> |
18 |
> IIRC there was a suggestion to make the system set dynamically grow to |
19 |
> contain all of the required dependencies of the packages explicitly |
20 |
> listed in the system set, but I'm not sure if it went anywhere. |
21 |
> |
22 |
> Anyways, the current contents of @system cause all kinds of surprises, |
23 |
> for example to FEATURES="buildsyspkg" users who rely on the feature |
24 |
> without realizing how small (and even "incomplete") @system actually |
25 |
> is. |
26 |
> |
27 |
> |
28 |
|
29 |
I just picked a random reply here. My $0.02 worth. If I try to remove |
30 |
portage itself, I get this: |
31 |
|
32 |
root@smoker / # emerge -Ca portage |
33 |
|
34 |
>>> These are the packages that would be unmerged: |
35 |
* Not unmerging package sys-apps/portage-2.2_rc61 since there is no valid |
36 |
* reason for portage to unmerge itself. |
37 |
|
38 |
>>> No packages selected for removal by unmerge |
39 |
root@smoker / # |
40 |
|
41 |
It appears you can't even remove portage at all. Now call me silly, |
42 |
couldn't it be said that removing something that would prevent the |
43 |
package manager from working constitute a little warning? After all, |
44 |
most likely the person is not thinking clearly that day and most likely |
45 |
doesn't REALLY want to do this. |
46 |
|
47 |
Is there not a way to at the very least post a warning and then ask a |
48 |
'are you sure' question like it does with the -a option? |
49 |
|
50 |
It's just that as a newbie ages ago, I did this too. I didn't realize |
51 |
that it was a nasty boo boo until afterwards. |
52 |
|
53 |
< dale crawls back under his rock > |
54 |
|
55 |
Dale |
56 |
|
57 |
:-) :-) |