Gentoo Archives: gentoo-user

From: Neil Bothwick <neil@××××××××××.uk>
To: gentoo-user@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Is it OK to get rid of app-alternatives/* ?
Date: Sun, 19 Feb 2023 10:30:54
Message-Id: 20230219103041.78e1efd1@digimed.co.uk
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-user] Is it OK to get rid of app-alternatives/* ? by Walter Dnes
1 On Wed, 15 Feb 2023 23:09:54 -0500, Walter Dnes wrote:
2
3 > > It's bad enough depclean deleting the active kernel if you don't
4 > > watch out, without something deciding to install a non-existent
5 > > kernel and deleting the live one :-)
6 >
7 > I have my own hand-coded script that runs "emerge --pretend
8 > --depclean" and tweaks/filters the output into another script called
9 > "cleanscript". I've set it to filter out "gentoo-sources". I then
10 > inspect "cleanscript" before running it. And, oh yeah, depclean wants
11 > to remove nano. I had to "emerge -n nano" to protect it.
12
13 You can add kernel sources to a set so they are never depcleaned
14
15 % cat sets.conf
16 [kernels]
17 class = portage.sets.dbapi.OwnerSet
18 world-candidate = False
19 files = /usr/src
20
21 Then emerge -n @kernels
22
23 I do the same with gcc so I can keep the previous version
24
25 [gcc]
26 class = portage.sets.dbapi.OwnerSet
27 world-candidate = False
28 files = /usr/x86_64-pc-linux-gnu/gcc-bin
29
30
31 --
32 Neil Bothwick
33
34 For security reasons, all text in this mail
35 is double-rot13 encrypted.

Replies

Subject Author
Re: [gentoo-user] Is it OK to get rid of app-alternatives/* ? David Rosenbaum <rosenbaumd181@×××××.com>