| 1 |
Apparently, though unproven, at 01:08 on Wednesday 08 June 2011, Walter Dnes |
| 2 |
did opine thusly: |
| 3 |
|
| 4 |
> On Tue, Jun 07, 2011 at 05:55:38AM -0700, Mark Knecht wrote |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> > On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 2:10 AM, Alan McKinnon <alan.mckinnon@×××××.com> |
| 7 |
wrote: |
| 8 |
> > > Latest portage-2.2.0_alpha38 has changed something with system set and |
| 9 |
> > > depclean handling. It now shows this: |
| 10 |
> > > |
| 11 |
> > > !!! 'app-editors/nano' is part of your system profile. |
| 12 |
> > > !!! Unmerging it may be damaging to your system. |
| 13 |
> > |
| 14 |
> > I saw the same thing here yesterday so I added nano & less to my world |
| 15 |
> > file just so I could move on. |
| 16 |
> |
| 17 |
> Has anyone ever considered a "virtual/app-editor" ebuild, and letting |
| 18 |
> vim/joe/nano/whatever satisfy it? |
| 19 |
|
| 20 |
y'know, now that you mention it: |
| 21 |
|
| 22 |
$ eix -e editor |
| 23 |
[I] virtual/editor |
| 24 |
Available versions: 0{tbz2} |
| 25 |
Installed versions: 0{tbz2}(12:10:07 10/06/10) |
| 26 |
Description: Virtual for editor |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
$ genlop -t editor |
| 29 |
* virtual/editor |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
Mon Aug 4 02:31:59 2008 >>> virtual/editor-0 |
| 32 |
merge time: 3 seconds. |
| 33 |
|
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
I think the answer is "Yes" |
| 36 |
|
| 37 |
:-) |
| 38 |
|
| 39 |
the virtual satisfies something like 27 different editors |
| 40 |
|
| 41 |
-- |
| 42 |
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com |
Archives