Archives
Archives
| From: | Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com> | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| To: | gentoo-user@l.g.o | ||
| Subject: | Re: [gentoo-user] Is equery depends still viable | ||
| Date: | Wed, 12 Nov 2008 21:15:21 | ||
| Message-Id: | 200811122312.32111.alan.mckinnon@gmail.com | ||
| In Reply to: | [gentoo-user] Is equery depends still viable by Harry Putnam |
||
| 1 | On Wednesday 12 November 2008 22:04:52 Harry Putnam wrote: |
| 2 | > With recent changes in portage in the last few mnths, is equery in |
| 3 | > general and `equery depends' in particular still reliable? |
| 4 | |
| 5 | I use it fairly often still, but do notice I get a lot of null output. So I no |
| 6 | longer trust it fully. At least it doesn't give false positives - what's in |
| 7 | the putput really is a valid depend. |
| 8 | |
| 9 | -- |
| 10 | alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com |
| Subject | Author |
|---|---|
| [gentoo-user] Re: Is equery depends still viable | Harry Putnam <reader@×××××××.com> |