| 1 |
On Wed, 12 Jul 2017 16:40:11 +1000 |
| 2 |
"Sam Jorna (wraeth)" <wraeth@g.o> wrote: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> If my concern in removing a package was whether it was a dependency, |
| 5 |
> it would make more sense to use --depclean in the first place. If I'm |
| 6 |
> using --unmerge, it's because I want the package unmerged regardless. |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
But you can't remember what you installed or ate for dinner. What if you |
| 9 |
are removing something you need? |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> > Didn't you just say something about meaningful output vs noise? |
| 12 |
> > That is always outputted and ends up becoming what you are saying. |
| 13 |
> > Funny! |
| 14 |
> > |
| 15 |
> And your suggesting adding more noise to it... Funny, I know. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
No a warning that mentions the package not being removed is not noise. |
| 18 |
It is useful output, like the warnings that exist for other things now. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
I guess in your opinion this warning is noise to you. |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
!!! 'sys-devel/gcc' is part of your system profile. |
| 23 |
!!! Unmerging it may be damaging to your system. |
| 24 |
|
| 25 |
It is YOUR comments that are funny, and going in a circular argument |
| 26 |
just to be argumentative and bringing nothing useful to the discussion. |
| 27 |
Which should be over now that bugs are filed.... |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
> > Depclean the user is cleaning things they are not aware of. Unmerge |
| 30 |
> > the user is removing something directly. They may think they do not |
| 31 |
> > need it. |
| 32 |
> |
| 33 |
> No. |
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
> '--depclean' is the user removing things they are not aware of. |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
You literally just re-typed what I did above replacing cleaning with |
| 38 |
removing. Are you paying any attention? |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
> '--depclean foo' is the user removing something they /are/ aware of |
| 41 |
> *if it's not a dependency*. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
That does not work the same. It will not remove a package from world. |
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
> '--unmerge foo' is the user explicitly removing something regardless |
| 46 |
> of whether it's a dependency. |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
BUT they are warned now for things that are in a profile or set. Thus |
| 49 |
they should be warned if a dependency. Its simply, but clearly your |
| 50 |
having a hard time grasping. |
| 51 |
|
| 52 |
> Therefore, '--depclean foo' can be seen as a safe '--unmerge foo' |
| 53 |
> which, from what I understand, is what you're aiming for. |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
No, as they are not the same. You cannot remember what you ate. Please |
| 56 |
stop trying to assume what I am after. Clearly we are very different. I |
| 57 |
know what I ate last night... |
| 58 |
|
| 59 |
> That's what the current warning to --unmerge says - removing packages |
| 60 |
> can break things, so please make sure this isn't a dependency and you |
| 61 |
> really want to remove this. |
| 62 |
|
| 63 |
They do not say anything about dependencies. It says the same message |
| 64 |
for everything. In some cases for system and set packages you get a |
| 65 |
warning. |
| 66 |
|
| 67 |
> How does replacing one warning with another warning that may or may |
| 68 |
> not be meaningful ("maybe it's a dep, maybe it isn't" as opposed to |
| 69 |
> "this can be dangerous, please make sure you know what you're doing") |
| 70 |
> make it any better? |
| 71 |
|
| 72 |
It is not replacing a warning. It is adding the same warning that exist |
| 73 |
in other situations in one it does not exists now, removing |
| 74 |
dependencies. |
| 75 |
|
| 76 |
Clearly you are having a hard time grasping this very simple concept. |
| 77 |
I am done, reply if you like, but this thread is serious noise now... |
| 78 |
|
| 79 |
-- |
| 80 |
William L. Thomson Jr. |
Archives