Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Mike Auty <ikelos@g.o>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Should preserve-libs be enabled by default?
Date: Thu, 29 May 2008 08:28:20
Message-Id: 483E6920.6050108@gentoo.org
In Reply to: [gentoo-dev] RFC: Should preserve-libs be enabled by default? by Marius Mauch
1 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
2 Hash: SHA1
3
4 Marius Mauch wrote:
5 | The purpose of this is to keep the system operational after library
6 | upgrades until all affected packages could be rebuilt and to simplify
7 | the process, not to avoid the rebuilds.
8
9 I couldn't find it mentioned in your email, but if portage is
10 effectively doing reference counts, what happens when its reference
11 count gets to 0? Once no ebuilds rely on the old library is it removed
12 automatically, or do the "you need to rebuild these" message just go away?
13
14 Is there a way to have portage delete the libraries once it's sure
15 they're no longer necessary? If so, is that done by rebuilding the
16 owning package itself, or by editing the owning pacakge's contents and
17 removing the old library?
18
19 Does @preserved-rebuild contain just the affected packages, or the
20 package containing the old library as well? (i.e. Does an "emerge
21 @preserved-rebuild" ensure that the old library will no longer exist on
22 your system, or not?)
23
24 Basically, if I can safely replace "revdep-rebuild" with "emerge
25 @preserved-rebuild" then I'd be happy to keep it enabled. If it's going
26 to leave cruft on the system (or then require manual rebuilds of
27 packages containing preserved libraries to clear out the cruft) then I'd
28 personally be inclined to turn it off and stick with revdep-rebuild...
29
30 Mike 5:)
31 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
32 Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux)
33
34 iEYEARECAAYFAkg+aSAACgkQu7rWomwgFXoR2ACeJnf+J/pd/GEEh5Ds/Q80sjOR
35 vIkAoKEyLD2lTGfehoSoYLP6pH/R++2J
36 =0sv1
37 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
38 --
39 gentoo-dev@l.g.o mailing list

Replies