| 1 |
On Tue, 16 Sep 2008 18:50:35 +0200, Matthias Bethke wrote: |
| 2 |
|
| 3 |
> > Seriously: can someone more skilled than me explain why using |
| 4 |
> > --resume-skipfirst and then trying to solve the unmerged packages |
| 5 |
> > is/can be a bad idea? How can this break the system? |
| 6 |
> |
| 7 |
> Frankly I have no idea. I've heard that argument many times in the |
| 8 |
> Paludis discussions but never even an attempt at an explanation that |
| 9 |
> went beyond "it breaks your system". My understanding is that you can |
| 10 |
> have two kinds of situation if an upgrade fails: |
| 11 |
> a) the failed package is not a dependency of any other package |
| 12 |
> b) the failed package is a dependency of at least one other package |
| 13 |
> In case a) you get to keep the old version, no problem. In case b) the |
| 14 |
> package that depends on the failed one can |
| 15 |
> b1) work with the old version |
| 16 |
> b2) require the upgrade (and say so in the ebuild) |
| 17 |
> In case b1) things will continue working just fine. In case b2) you'll |
| 18 |
> get another failed emerge as portage will notice the unmet dependency, |
| 19 |
> so you get to keep the old version, no problem. |
| 20 |
> |
| 21 |
> Did I miss anything? |
| 22 |
|
| 23 |
I think you missed an important part of the Gentoo philosophy, that it |
| 24 |
gives you the loaded gun but it's up to you to not point it at your foot. |
| 25 |
Not providing options that could potentially break a system in certain |
| 26 |
circumstances is for a Nanny Distro. Here the ethos is "here's the tool, |
| 27 |
read the man page and don't blame us if you do something stupid". |
| 28 |
|
| 29 |
Does paludis also refuse to unmerge packages in the system set? |
| 30 |
|
| 31 |
|
| 32 |
-- |
| 33 |
Neil Bothwick |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
Eagles may soar, but Wombles don't get sucked into jet engines |
Archives