| 1 |
Neil Bothwick wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sat, 05 Dec 2009 19:15:29 -0600, Dale wrote: |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> |
| 5 |
>>>> Good catch Volker. I didn't notice that part. He needs to become |
| 6 |
>>>> very familiar with the -1 option but even that is not good in every |
| 7 |
>>>> case. If it is a package that needs to be in world, then that option |
| 8 |
>>>> shouldn't be used either otherwise a --depclean would remove it. |
| 9 |
>>>> |
| 10 |
> |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
>>> He's updating, so packages that need to be in world are already there. |
| 13 |
>>> |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
>> If he is using the command he typed in, his world file is going to be |
| 17 |
>> huge. Read what he wrote again. He is doing the updates individually |
| 18 |
>> without a -u or a -1 or anything else. That means every time he |
| 19 |
>> updates, that package goes into the world file. |
| 20 |
>> |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> I read, and understood, what he wrote, even if it turned out to be not |
| 23 |
> wheat he meant. I was responding to your "If it is a package that needs |
| 24 |
> to be in world, then that option shouldn't be used either otherwise a |
| 25 |
> --depclean would remove it." which is not true if the package is already |
| 26 |
> in world. |
| 27 |
> |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
I was making the point tho that if it is a new emerge and needs to be in |
| 30 |
world, then the -1 option would not add it. If a person them runs |
| 31 |
--depclean, it would them remove the package and its dependencies. I |
| 32 |
know for me at least, I rarely re-emerge the same package twice by |
| 33 |
hand. If I change the USE flags, I let -n catch that. If it is a |
| 34 |
update, I let -u catch that. |
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
Dale |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
:-) :-) |
Archives