| 1 |
On 19 January 2012 17:38, Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> Hilco Wijbenga wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On 19 January 2012 16:05, Dale <rdalek1967@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> Well, the USE flag got changed. Isn't that what -N is supposed to do? |
| 5 |
>> |
| 6 |
>> -N == --newuse not --changed-use :-) |
| 7 |
>> |
| 8 |
>> It's exactly for this reason that I use --changed-use and not |
| 9 |
>> --newuse. See the man page for the details. |
| 10 |
>> |
| 11 |
>> |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> |
| 14 |
> Well, sort of seems like about the same. The dev changed the USE flag, |
| 15 |
> it is changed, portage sees it was changed, portage wants to recompile |
| 16 |
> it with the new/changed flags. |
| 17 |
> |
| 18 |
> I'm not exactly clear on the difference between newuse and changed-use. |
| 19 |
> If you enable a USE flag, it is changed. If you disable a USE flag, it |
| 20 |
> is changed. If a new flag comes along and it is different than the last |
| 21 |
> install, then it can be either a new flag or a changed flag. It should |
| 22 |
> recompile either way. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
The point here is that a USE flag was removed but it wasn't enabled |
| 25 |
anyway. So no recompile necessary. Which is what --changed-use is |
| 26 |
supposed to be for (as I understand the man page). |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
> Maybe there is some subtle difference somewhere that I am missing. |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Which is why I included what it says in the man page and then referred |
| 31 |
you to said man page... ;-) |
Archives