| 1 |
Jan Kundrát posted <43BEA2C1.2050902@g.o>, excerpted below, on |
| 2 |
Fri, 06 Jan 2006 18:02:57 +0100: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> Duncan wrote: |
| 5 |
>> My thinking too, until I saw the portage dev (JStubbs?) mention it wasn't |
| 6 |
>> needed. |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> I believe the thinking is that emerge --ask is basically emerge --pretend |
| 9 |
>> with an opportunity to continue stuck on the end, thus eliminating running |
| 10 |
>> the same command only without the --pretend again, therefore eliminating |
| 11 |
>> running portage's dep calculation step twice, once for the pretend, then |
| 12 |
>> again for the run. |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Okay, but I'd say that Portage internals like if the the same code gets |
| 15 |
> used by --ask and --pretend are not relevant for this GLEP. Why don't |
| 16 |
> add a note specifying the correct behavior? |
| 17 |
|
| 18 |
Because that code will be implemented in portage, and the portage dev |
| 19 |
likely to implement it said it was a superfluous reference. =8^) |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Still, I'd prefer it referenced just for definition's sake, but when the |
| 22 |
portage dev says it isn't a superfluous reference, and that particular |
| 23 |
section is specifying portage implementation... |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
-- |
| 26 |
Duncan - List replies preferred. No HTML msgs. |
| 27 |
"Every nonfree program has a lord, a master -- |
| 28 |
and if you use the program, he is your master." Richard Stallman in |
| 29 |
http://www.linuxdevcenter.com/pub/a/linux/2004/12/22/rms_interview.html |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
gentoo-dev@g.o mailing list |
Archives