| 1 |
On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 12:47 PM, Mark Knecht <markknecht@×××××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Mon, Jan 2, 2012 at 9:39 AM, Michael Orlitzky <michael@××××××××.com> wrote: |
| 3 |
>> On 01/02/12 12:06, Michael Mol wrote: |
| 4 |
>>> |
| 5 |
>>> That's the purpose of the "emerge -p" step. Presumably, you would see |
| 6 |
>>> that there's a package in the list that you're not comfortable with |
| 7 |
>>> removing, you'd decide you didn't want it removed, and you'd add it |
| 8 |
>>> back to your world set. |
| 9 |
>> |
| 10 |
>> Yeah, I'm not sure I can remove any of them. The only way I see to |
| 11 |
>> determine what's necessary at this point is to remove it and see if |
| 12 |
>> stuff breaks. |
| 13 |
>> |
| 14 |
> |
| 15 |
> Again, 'equery depends' will tell you if any package locatable through |
| 16 |
> the @world hierarchy needs the package. No need to uninstall anything |
| 17 |
> to do that level of investigation. revdep-rebuild -I is also useful, |
| 18 |
> although more historically than now. |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
The problem is that he won't know which atoms in his current world set |
| 21 |
are necessarily depended upon by other packages vs the ones which are |
| 22 |
requested by his customers' request. (Portage knows nothing about his |
| 23 |
customers' requests; it only knows he installed packages at one point |
| 24 |
or another.) |
| 25 |
|
| 26 |
[snip] |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
:wq |
Archives