| 1 |
If I were a python hacker or knew portage internals, I'd be willing to |
| 2 |
help out with the "clean" database solution, but I think this is a good |
| 3 |
temporary solution to the problem. It basically does the same thing |
| 4 |
we've been doing as a temporary solution but makes it easier by placing |
| 5 |
it in an eclass for us. |
| 6 |
|
| 7 |
As for handling the case when a library isn't needed anymore... yes, I |
| 8 |
agree that this doesn't address that case beyond telling the user to |
| 9 |
delete the lib once they've run the revdep-rebuild, but that's basically |
| 10 |
all we're doing right now anyways... |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
On Sat, 2004-10-02 at 18:37 -0400, Mike Frysinger wrote: |
| 13 |
> On Saturday 02 October 2004 06:26 pm, Jeremy Huddleston wrote: |
| 14 |
> > I'd like to get feedback on the following addition to the eutils.eclass |
| 15 |
> > which I'd like to commit to cvs in the next couple days |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> not a very clean solution ... it doesnt handle the case of when the library |
| 18 |
> isnt needed anymore ... |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> http://bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=62207 |
| 21 |
> this describes a pretty decent solution; just lacks an implementation |
| 22 |
> -mike |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> -- |
| 25 |
> gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
-- |
| 28 |
Jeremy Huddleston <eradicator@g.o> |
Archives