| 1 |
On Sunday 02 October 2005 08:25 pm, Mike Williams wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Monday 03 October 2005 00:49, Dave Nebinger wrote: |
| 3 |
> > > The likely explanation is that ant-core is not a dependency (direct or |
| 4 |
> > > deep) of your "world" list. |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > Ah, but if it is installed it must have been a dependency somewhere or in |
| 7 |
> > place as a result of a direct emerge. |
| 8 |
> |
| 9 |
> At some point, yes. Doesn't mean it is so now. |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
Well I should have qualified it by saying that I don't clean out packages; |
| 12 |
when I install something it is because I want to try it out and/or use it. |
| 13 |
When I stop using the package, it still stays installed. |
| 14 |
|
| 15 |
So the dependency should still exist and be valid. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
> > Eix and emerge both knew it was installed and that it needed to be |
| 18 |
> > updated at the point when I was going to emerge eclipse. |
| 19 |
> > |
| 20 |
> > So I don't think that answer covers it... |
| 21 |
> |
| 22 |
> Is the eix database upto date? Are you really sure ant-core is actually |
| 23 |
> installed? You said "it wanting to emerge ant-core", that suggests to me |
| 24 |
> that ant-core isn't installed, unless you meant "it wanting to |
| 25 |
> upgrade/update ant-core". |
| 26 |
|
| 27 |
Eix is updated every night after the emerge --sync completes. You'll have to |
| 28 |
go back to the original post but eix (as well as emerge --search but I didn't |
| 29 |
include that output) shows that ant-core is installed. |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
The emerge --pretend did report that mozilla and eclipse were new, but |
| 32 |
ant-core was an update. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
-- |
| 35 |
gentoo-user@g.o mailing list |
Archives