| 1 |
On Monday 19 September 2005 13:16, gentuxx wrote: |
| 2 |
> If I update firefox with the --oneshot option, I know that it won't |
| 3 |
> update the "world" tree, but why? Why is that the recommended |
| 4 |
> procedure? Does that give me any benefit? Also, why would a package |
| 5 |
> be available as a "--oneshot" and NOT through a normal "emerge -Dupv |
| 6 |
> world"? |
| 7 |
|
| 8 |
The package would be available through -Dupv as well, but not everybody |
| 9 |
likes to update all packages (especially on servers). |
| 10 |
|
| 11 |
> I love how portage unifies the packaging system, and I feel like if I |
| 12 |
> run all of these "--oneshot" updates for security fixes, that I'll |
| 13 |
> have all of these "stray" programs running around on my system, that |
| 14 |
> won't get updated next time I emerge "world". |
| 15 |
|
| 16 |
--oneshot won't remove the package from world. It just prevents it from |
| 17 |
being added. If the package is installed but not in world, it is presumably |
| 18 |
there as a dependency from another package. Hence, updating world will |
| 19 |
still grab the package. Using --oneshot just keeps the world file clean. |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
-- |
| 22 |
Jason Stubbs |
Archives