| 1 |
On Sunday 24 May 2009 11:28:30 Neil Bothwick wrote: |
| 2 |
> On Sun, 24 May 2009 11:07:13 +0200, Alan McKinnon wrote: |
| 3 |
> > > Portage is not in system, only the virtual. That can be |
| 4 |
> > > satisfied by Paludis, which does not need Python. |
| 5 |
> > |
| 6 |
> > Lucky for you, I know your sense of humour by now :-) |
| 7 |
> > |
| 8 |
> > Doesn't help portage users though, and portage is still the default |
| 9 |
> > package manager on Gentoo. I don't see that changing any time soon, if |
| 10 |
> > ever. |
| 11 |
> > |
| 12 |
> > Besides, unless you do it manually, you need portage to install |
| 13 |
> > paludis, right? Without python, you don't get paludis. |
| 14 |
> > |
| 15 |
> > Either way, it's a bug. portage supports inheriting multiple parent |
| 16 |
> > profiles. One approach would be to add a new collection of profiles in |
| 17 |
> > addition to the existing base/, default/ and targets/ - called say |
| 18 |
> > pkgmgr. |
| 19 |
> |
| 20 |
> Is it really a bug? Postage is the default for the virtual and it depends |
| 21 |
> on python, so there is no need for python itself to be in @system. This |
| 22 |
> doesn't cause any problems except the one Dale mentions, which is that |
| 23 |
> FEATURES=buildsyspkg does not build a package for python. man make.conf |
| 24 |
> describes this option as "Build binary packages for just packages in the |
| 25 |
> system set. Which is accurate but maybe not the desired behaviour. The |
| 26 |
> option should really by to build packages for packages in @system and |
| 27 |
> their dependencies. Put another way, build all the packages necessary to |
| 28 |
> run "emerge -eK @system". |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> I'd suggest filing an enhancement request on b.g.o. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
Using the "this is very unexpected behaviour" definition of bug, I certainly |
| 33 |
do call it a bug. All three of the following commands, produce the same end |
| 34 |
result (a b0rked system), but are treated very differently. I my mind, delete |
| 35 |
warnings should be handled the same as installs, by taking the entire dep tree |
| 36 |
into account: |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
alan@nazgul ~ $ sudo emerge -avC python |
| 39 |
Password: |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
>>> These are the packages that would be unmerged: |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
dev-lang/python |
| 44 |
selected: 2.5.4-r2 2.6.2 |
| 45 |
protected: none |
| 46 |
omitted: none |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
>>> 'Selected' packages are slated for removal. |
| 49 |
>>> 'Protected' and 'omitted' packages will not be removed. |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
Would you like to unmerge these packages? [Yes/No] n |
| 52 |
|
| 53 |
Quitting. |
| 54 |
|
| 55 |
alan@nazgul ~ $ sudo emerge -avC portage |
| 56 |
|
| 57 |
>>> These are the packages that would be unmerged: |
| 58 |
* Not unmerging package sys-apps/portage-2.2_rc33 since there is no valid |
| 59 |
* reason for portage to unmerge itself. |
| 60 |
|
| 61 |
>>> No packages selected for removal by unmerge |
| 62 |
alan@nazgul ~ $ sudo emerge -avC gcc |
| 63 |
|
| 64 |
>>> These are the packages that would be unmerged: |
| 65 |
|
| 66 |
|
| 67 |
!!! 'sys-devel/gcc' is part of your system profile. |
| 68 |
!!! Unmerging it may be damaging to your system. |
| 69 |
|
| 70 |
|
| 71 |
sys-devel/gcc |
| 72 |
selected: 4.3.3-r2 |
| 73 |
protected: none |
| 74 |
omitted: none |
| 75 |
|
| 76 |
>>> 'Selected' packages are slated for removal. |
| 77 |
>>> 'Protected' and 'omitted' packages will not be removed. |
| 78 |
|
| 79 |
Would you like to unmerge these packages? [Yes/No] n |
| 80 |
|
| 81 |
Quitting. |
| 82 |
|
| 83 |
I'll file a feature request |
| 84 |
|
| 85 |
-- |
| 86 |
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com |
Archives