Gentoo Archives: gentoo-portage-dev

From: Mike Gilbert <floppym@g.o>
To: gentoo-portage-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 1/3] emerge: Deprecate --autounmask
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2014 16:50:06
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 1/3] emerge: Deprecate --autounmask by Alexander Berntsen
1 On Sun, Jan 19, 2014 at 5:47 AM, Alexander Berntsen
2 <alexander@××××××.net> wrote:
3 > On 19/01/14 11:32, Pacho Ramos wrote:
4 >> Then, I guess "-ap" would be the equivalent of --autounmask=n and
5 >> should behave in the same way, right? In that case, no problem
6 >> (even if I think we should document this since using --ask
7 >> --pretend at the same time doesn't look so intuitive to me :( )
8 > Since --ask implies --autounmask, the following are all the same for
9 > autounmask-purposes:
10 >
11 > emerge --pretend --ask foo
12 > emerge --pretend --autounmask foo
13 >
14 > As for "emerge --autounmask=n foo", This will actually spit out the
15 > suggestions, just not ask to write them.
16 >
17 > While playing with this, I discovered a possible misbehaviour though.
18 > With "emerge --ask --autounmask=n", --ask takes precedence to
19 > - --autounmask=n. Maybe it shouldn't. But this can always be changed.
21 Please give me a way to shut off autounmask entirely no mater what
22 other options I pass to emerge. Tying it to --ask with no way to
23 disable it is not acceptable.
25 Generating the unmask entries can cause quite a performance hit, and
26 often causes portage to come up with nonsensical solutions when an
27 error message would be much more helpful.


Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 1/3] emerge: Deprecate --autounmask Alexander Berntsen <alexander@××××××.net>
Re: [gentoo-portage-dev] [PATCH 1/3] emerge: Deprecate --autounmask Alexander Berntsen <alexander@××××××.net>