Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Michael Mol <mikemol@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Anyone Else "Ping-Ponging" with fltk?
Date: Wed, 28 Mar 2012 15:57:34
Message-Id: CA+czFiC3Gz_bm6oqKeH2Xj7qRdwVuy2QzedaS4-q-2uhFK00eA@mail.gmail.com
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Anyone Else "Ping-Ponging" with fltk? by Todd Goodman
1 On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Todd Goodman <tsg@×××××××××.net> wrote:
2 > * David W Noon <dwnoon@××××××××.com> [120328 11:22]:
3 >> On Wed, 28 Mar 2012 15:58:00 +0100, Neil Bothwick wrote about Re:
4 >> [gentoo-user] Anyone Else "Ping-Ponging" with fltk?:
5 >>
6 >> > On Wed, 28 Mar 2012 10:15:19 -0400, Todd Goodman wrote:
7 >> [snip]
8 >> > > Or have I broken my system?
9 >> >
10 >> > Probably. There is rarely a good reason for having libraries in world.
11 >>
12 >> For us programmers it is often essential that we have one or more
13 >> library packages in world, since we might be using that library (or
14 >> those libraries) in projects we are developing.
15 >>
16 >> The question I think Todd Goodman is trying to ask is why a package in
17 >> world should be a candidate for depclean.
18 >> --
19 >> Regards,
20 >>
21 >> Dave  [RLU #314465]
22 >
23 > Yes, exactly.
24 >
25 > And more specifically, if the two versions of fltk are slotted it makes
26 > me even more surprised that portage wants to depclean the 1.3.0 version.
27
28 If nothing is indicating a specific dependency on that version, it
29 makes sense for portage to only maintain one copy of the library on
30 the system at one time.
31
32 If you specifically want that version kept, you can add the version
33 number you want kept to your world file, I think. Not sure.
34
35 --
36 :wq