| 1 |
On Mon, Sep 19 2011, Paul Hartman wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> On Mon, Sep 19, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Allan Gottlieb <gottlieb@×××.edu> wrote: |
| 4 |
>> OK. But the claim was that: if |
| 5 |
>> revdep-rebuild |
| 6 |
>> with no argument found nothing to build, then |
| 7 |
>> revdep-rebuild --library <some-library> |
| 8 |
>> will find nothing. |
| 9 |
> |
| 10 |
> I think what everyone (except Michael S) seems to be confused about is: |
| 11 |
> |
| 12 |
> Normal revdep-rebuild (with no options) looks for broken shared |
| 13 |
> library dependencies and rebuilds them. If you run it again, it won't |
| 14 |
> rebuild anything, because the dependency has been fixed. |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> Using the --library switch, however, it looks for everything built |
| 17 |
> against that library, regardless of whether or not the dependency is |
| 18 |
> broken, and rebuilds it. If you run this command 10 times in a row |
| 19 |
> it'll rebuild the same libraries 10 times. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> Presumably, there are cases (like libpng) when it is desirable to |
| 22 |
> rebuild dependencies but they aren't "broken" in the way that |
| 23 |
> revdep-rebuild normally can detect. So using --library will |
| 24 |
> brute-force rebuild everything that depends on that library, just to |
| 25 |
> make sure they are built against the new version. |
| 26 |
> |
| 27 |
> Moral of the story; if an ebuild tells you to revdep-rebuild |
| 28 |
> --library, do it. :) |
| 29 |
|
| 30 |
Thanks for the clarification. |
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
When revdep-rebuild --library is suggested should we run it |
| 33 |
before or after the ordinary revdep-rebuild that we typically |
| 34 |
run after each update world? |
| 35 |
(That was actually my original question :-) |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
thanks, |
| 38 |
allan |
Archives