| 1 |
Daniel Frey wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 05/29/2016 02:20 AM, Dale wrote: |
| 3 |
>> Neil Bothwick wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> I have a weekly system health check cron job that includes revdep-rebuild |
| 5 |
>>> -pi (hint to Alan: that's the correct way to have revdep-rebuild ignore |
| 6 |
>>> the results of previous runs). It rarely finds anything. There's still |
| 7 |
>>> the occasional glitch with preserved-libs, but I fons it works |
| 8 |
>>> ninety-lots % of the time, and it is far better than the "let it break |
| 9 |
>>> then try to fix it approach" of the days we needed to rely on |
| 10 |
>>> revdep-rebuild. |
| 11 |
>>> |
| 12 |
>>> |
| 13 |
>> |
| 14 |
>> I haven't ran revdep-rebuild in likely over a year. Just for giggles, I |
| 15 |
>> ran it a bit ago. The only thing it found was libreoffice. That's not |
| 16 |
>> exactly a critical package or anything. Given that, I don't think it |
| 17 |
>> really serves any point. |
| 18 |
>> |
| 19 |
>> I wonder if me having backtrack set to 100 helps with that? Of course, |
| 20 |
>> unlike poor Alan, I also have a sane approach to upgrading. I also run |
| 21 |
>> the latest non-9999 version of portage. |
| 22 |
>> |
| 23 |
>> Dale |
| 24 |
>> |
| 25 |
>> :-) :-) |
| 26 |
>> |
| 27 |
>> |
| 28 |
> I should correct myself, I always run revdep-rebuild after a depclean. |
| 29 |
> The point it, portage doesn't catch everything, regardless of its |
| 30 |
> importance or not. |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> Dan |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
> |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
It seems to here. Like I said, I haven't ran it in over a year and all |
| 37 |
it found was libreoffice. Everything else was fine. I don't run |
| 38 |
--depclean after every upgrade but do after either a big update or every |
| 39 |
other update, whichever comes first. |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
Dale |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
:-) :-) |
Archives