| 1 |
On Monday 15 June 2009 18:50:58 Stroller wrote: |
| 2 |
> On 15 Jun 2009, at 08:34, Alan McKinnon wrote: |
| 3 |
> > ... |
| 4 |
> > Much more work than it's worth. It's easier to reinstall. |
| 5 |
> > ... |
| 6 |
> > There was a recent thread on this, and the OP eventually decided to |
| 7 |
> > write a |
| 8 |
> > script that listed every package he had and copy this to |
| 9 |
> > package.mask (with |
| 10 |
> > ">" in front of course), then just wait for everything in stable to |
| 11 |
> > catch up. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> I considered that to be an easy & straight-forward way to undertake |
| 14 |
> the "downgrade". |
| 15 |
> |
| 16 |
> I'm not sure if every installed package was marked in this way or |
| 17 |
> merely every package in world? |
| 18 |
|
| 19 |
Mark everything. Otherwise you end up with with 150 packages in world at |
| 20 |
stable, and the other 850 packages which are DEPs at unstable. And that's |
| 21 |
where all hell breaks loose. |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
Whether a dep is installed arch or ~arch depends only on ACCEPT_KEYWORDS and |
| 24 |
explicit directives in /etc/portage/*, and nothing to do with the package that |
| 25 |
pulled it in (exception: a package that defines a version or range of versions |
| 26 |
in it's DEPENDS) |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
-- |
| 30 |
alan dot mckinnon at gmail dot com |
Archives