| 1 |
On Tuesday 10 May 2011 16:13:41 Grant Edwards wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 2011-05-10, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
> > Apparently, though unproven, at 16:40 on Tuesday 10 May 2011, Grant |
| 4 |
> > Edwards |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > did opine thusly: |
| 7 |
> >> I ran emerge --depclean the other day on one of my machines and it |
| 8 |
> >> removed Python 2.6. I was using Python 2.6 as my "default" python, |
| 9 |
> >> and depclean's removal of it broke a _lot_ of stuff. About a half |
| 10 |
> >> day's worth of hassle later I had Python 2.6 re-installed and my |
| 11 |
> >> system was again usable. |
| 12 |
> >> |
| 13 |
> >> In order to avoid the same circus on my other machines, how do I |
| 14 |
> >> prevent emerge --depclean from removing Python 2.6? |
| 15 |
> > |
| 16 |
> > Put that slot in world: |
| 17 |
> >=dev-lang/python:2.6 |
| 18 |
> > |
| 19 |
> > I suppose there are better and more automagically elegant ways of doing |
| 20 |
> > it, but this works. |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> Thanks! |
| 23 |
> |
| 24 |
> (you need to leave out the '='). |
| 25 |
> |
| 26 |
> > I think the issue happens because portage does not take eselect |
| 27 |
> > choices into account when building it's dep graph, it only uses the |
| 28 |
> > DEPENDS in ebuilds. |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> Apparently so. It seems like it ought to pay attention to eselect. |
| 31 |
> If I've explicitly configured my system to use 2.6 instead of 2.7, |
| 32 |
> removing 2.6 doesn't seem like a good thing... |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
I am not sure I understand: |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
If you eselect python 2.7 and run python-updater (and revdep-rebuild just in |
| 37 |
case) I would think that you *should* have a working system. Unless some |
| 38 |
particular package is hardcoded to use 2.6 things should not really break. |
| 39 |
|
| 40 |
Am I wrong here? |
| 41 |
-- |
| 42 |
Regards, |
| 43 |
Mick |
Archives