1 |
On Sun, Apr 27, 2008 at 4:14 AM, Neil Walker <neil@×××××××.nu> wrote: |
2 |
> Neil Bothwick wrote: |
3 |
> |
4 |
> > I suggest you read the subject header and the original post. It is quite |
5 |
> > clear what Mark was talking about, and these files are removed by emerge |
6 |
> > --sync. |
7 |
> > |
8 |
> > |
9 |
> |
10 |
> I have done that - in fact, I have been following the entire thread. |
11 |
> However, it cannot be assumed that everyone does. That particular post could |
12 |
> easily have misled someone just dipping in for the first time into believing |
13 |
> that "emerge --sync" is dangerous. I felt it necessary to correct that. :) |
14 |
> |
15 |
|
16 |
Neil, |
17 |
I went back and read my original post to better underdtand your |
18 |
point. In one way I completely agree with you. Personally I think the |
19 |
post was *very* clear about what the problem was and how it came to |
20 |
be. However if I read the last line in isolation, quoted here: |
21 |
|
22 |
"Did this machine just get messed up over time and I didn't notice or |
23 |
did emerge --sync remove the profile from the system thus breaking |
24 |
everything?" |
25 |
|
26 |
then I would agree that the use of the word pair 'break everything' |
27 |
was unfortunate. It would have been more accurate had I written 'break |
28 |
emerge'. Clearly 'everything' was NOT broken on that machine after |
29 |
running emerge --sync. To me the post was clear and coherrant but I |
30 |
could certainly agree that a complete newbie *might* have found that |
31 |
last line frightening if they hadn't correctly understood that I was |
32 |
only talking about my ability to run emerge. |
33 |
|
34 |
I was actually pretty careful about how I wrote the original post |
35 |
but that one got by me. Sorry! |
36 |
|
37 |
Thanks, |
38 |
Mark |
39 |
-- |
40 |
gentoo-user@l.g.o mailing list |